1920s: Pandit Malaviya shuddi (reconversion) movement
The term ‘shuddhi’ literally means ‘purification’. It refers to the re-conversion into the Hindu fold of non-Hindus, especially of those Hindus who have been converted to other religions by hook or crook. The word ‘shuddhi’ has been retained throughout in this section. Savarkar
Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya was the president of the Indian National Congress during 1909 and in 1918. Pandit Malaviya led the Congress to oppose the just claims of the Muslim community. He founded the Hindu Mahasabha in 1906. Malaviya was a rabid racist and communalist conservative who believed in the ‘Varnashrama Dharma’ (caste system).
Before Gandhis arrival from Africa the Indian National Congress (INC)was led by people like Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Bipin Chandra Pal, Lala Lajpat Rai, Gopal Krishna Gokhale, and Mohammed Ali Jinnah. Jinnah had excellent relations with Dadabhai Naoroji, the president of the sister Indian National Association and later Member of Parliament in the British House of Commons, the first Indian to win a seat there. Jinnah was called the Muslim Gokhle. Instead of creating consensus politics, the Congress moved to the religious fanatics of the time like Malaviya.
There were other such “Hitlers” who wanted Mahabharta cleansed of all Muslims, Jians, Sikhs and Chiristians. Here is Savarkar.
…Most of the nations that could not root out the political and religious power of the Muslims were destroyed and became Muslim themselves. But even those non-Muslim nations who succeeded in toppling Muslim political power but kept Muslim religious power intact could not escape from the persistent and terrible Muslim menace. Only three to five nations did not rest after toppling the political power of Muslims but immediately launched a bitter war against their religious power and made their nation free of Muslims. These nations alone not only managed to survive but actually smashed the Muslim menace. (1963, Sahaa soneri pane or Six Glorious Epochs of Indian History, Samagra Savarkar vangmaya, Vol.4, p. 787). Savarkar
I do not despise, let alone hate Muslim or Christian brethren, indeed even the most primitive tribes in the human race. I oppose the wickedness of individuals and groups belonging to them when I see it. It is my hope and conviction that Hindu-Muslim unity can be based on a permanent and beneficial footing only through the practice of shuddhi. (1927, Majhi janmathep or The Story of My Transportation for Life, Samagra Savarkar vangmaya, Vol.1, p. 511). Savarkar
Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya a former president of the Indian National Congress led the "Shuddi" (reconversion) movement directed as Muslims. Pandit Malaviya wanted to follow Hitler's plans
Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya and Lal Lajpat Rai, both ex-Congress Presidents, founded their own Nationalist Party that year, a Hindu first communal party, which won many seats in the United Provinces…..
Malaviya was president of the Hindu Mahasaba, a conserative communal society that focused on saving cows and slaughter Muslims while trying to force the conversions of Muslims to Hinduism, arguing that most of India’s Muslim population had originally been Hindus but had forcibly been converted to Islam during some five hundred years of Muslim rule.
One of the most militant popular Hindu communal leaders of that “reconversion” (shudhi) movement, Swami Shraddhanand, was assassinated in Delhi that December by a Muslim extremist. The swami, like Lala Lajpat Rai, belonged to another fundamentalist Hindu society, the Arya Samaj, which advocated turning back India’s history more than three thousand years to an ancient Aryan tribal polity, reflected in Vedic scripture, when Brahmans and cows were treated as gods on earth.Rajib Dogars
Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya led the “Shuddi” (reconversion) movement. One of the most salient developments in the 1920s was the launching of the shuddhi movement by the Arya Samaj to bring into the Hindu fold various groups considered outside the pale of what had now come to be defined as ‘Hinduism’, including untouchables and, later, Muslim, Christian and even Sikh communities. The Arya shuddhi campaign provoked Muslim leaders and groups to respond, and this took the form of various tablighi or Islamic missionary initiatives intended to counter the Arya Samaj’s conversion drive and, going further, to attempt to spread Islam among non-Muslims as well.
The first recorded shuddhi of a born Muslim was reported in 1877, when Dayanand Saraswati performed the shuddhi of a Muslim man from Dehra Dun, giving him the name of Alakhdhari. Individual conversions of this sort were few and far between, for such converts not only severed all social ties with their relatives but were also not fully accepted as equals not just by the Sanatani Hindus, who vociferously opposed the shuddhi project, but even by members of the Arya Samaj, who Ghai says, ‘behaved like most of the traditionalists and conservatives, fearing the wrath of their caste biraderi’. Clearly then, the Aryas realized, shuddhi among the Muslims would have to take the form of conversion of entire Muslim social groups if it was to really succeed. As a prelude to the actual launching of this ambitious missionary drive, towards the end of the nineteenth century Maharaja Ranbir Singh, the Hindu ruler of the largely Muslim state of Kashmir, is said to have commissioned the preparation of a 21-volume encyclopaedia by the name of Ranbir Karit Prayaschit Mahanibandh ['Ranbir's Great Essay on Repentance'], which argued the case and suggested strategies for the mass conversion of all the ‘neo-Muslim communities’ [nau Muslim aqwam] of India to ‘Hinduism’. This book, Muslim leaders were to later allege, had been secretly circulated among leading Hindus so that the Muslims remained unaware of the plot.
The first attempts by the Aryas at mass conversions of Muslim groups date to 1908, when Arya missionaries began touring the area around Deeg in the Bharatpur State in eastern Rajputana, calling upon Muslims there to renounce Islam, which, they alleged, had been forcibly imposed on their ancestors.
Some years later, Arya missionaries found active among the neo-Muslim Malkanas, a Rajput group who claimed to be Muslim but followed several Hindu customs and beliefs, in Etawah, Kanpur, Shahajahnpur, Hardoi, Meerut and Mainpuri in the western United Provinces, exhorting them to return to what they called their ‘ancestral religion’. In 1910, shuddhi sabhas were set up in several places in these districts, and although it was claimed that they had converted some 1000 Malkana Muslims to the Hindu fold, they were wound up the following year. As in the case of Deeg, the Aryas are said to have met with little success, being successfully countered by the intervention of local Muslim bodies working in association with the Anjuman Hidayat-ul Islam, a Delhi-based Muslim missionary organization.
A decade later, however, the Aryas were to launch the shuddhi campaign in the Malkana belt on a war-footing. In August 1922, in the wake of grossly exaggerated reports of forced conversions of Hindus in Malabar in the course of the Mappilla rebellion, the Kshatriya Upakarini Sabha ['Kshatriya Upliftment Society'], an organization of Hindu Rajputs patronized by Rajput princes and landlords, passed a resolution at a meeting in Allahabad calling for the conversion of the Muslim Rajputs to the Hindu fold. In December that year, the Sabha met once again, and decided to launch a campaign to convert the Malkanas to ‘Hinduism’. This provided the stimulus to the Aryas to start shuddhi work among the Malkanas. In August 1923, Shraddhanand, the leading Arya shuddhi advocate, presided over a meeting to discuss strategies for the shuddhi of the Malkanas. The fact that the meeting was attended by leading Sanatani, Jain and Sikh spokesmen, all of whom vociferously supported the shuddhi campaign, clearly suggests, as Muslim leaders were to allege, that the race for numbers and political interests, rather than the propagation of the Arya brand of ‘Hinduism’, were the motivating factors behind the planned missionary drive. The meeting approved the setting up of the Bharatiya Hindu Shuddhi Sabha, an all-India shuddhi council, whose objective was said to be the conversion of all non-Hindu groups all over India to the Hindu fold.
The shuddhi campaign among the Malkanas, which was launched in early 1923, reached its peak by the end of 1927, by which time some 1,63,000 Malkana Muslims are said to have been brought into the Hindu fold. Significantly, although the Aryas played the leading role in the drive, the shuddhi-ed Malkanas, by and large, did not convert to the Arya faith as such. Other than renouncing some of their Islamic practices, such as burial of the dead or male circumcision, there seems to have been little change in their own beliefs and practices. If they chose not to accept the Arya brand of Vedic ‘Hinduism’, orthodox Hindus seemed reluctant to accept them, considering them as ritually impure and inferior. Having ‘rescued’ them from their Islamic past, the Aryas and the Sanatanis were quite content to leave the Malkanas to their own devices. De-Islamization, and not an impelling urge to spread Arya beliefs, seems to have been the fundamental impulse behind the Arya shuddhi drive among the Malkanas.
Shuddhi emerged as a powerful mobilizational symbol and tool to consolidate Hindu ranks, helping galvanize the process of the construction of a pan-Indian Hindu community rigidly set apart from the rest. It is hardly surprising that Shradhhanand, the leading force behind the Malkana shuddhi, was also the most ardent advocate of sanghathan, the consolidation and militarization of all Hindudom. As testimony to the success of the shuddhi campaign in mobilizing and consolidating the Hindus, both Aryas as well as the Sanatanis who had initially been vehemently opposed to shuddhi, as one, transcending deep-seated caste, sectarian, racial, linguistic and regional divisions, the Tribune of Lahore, in its editorial of 2 May, 1927, remarked: ‘The shuddhi… propaganda is no longer the exclusive concern of the Arya Samaj; an overwhelming majority of the Hindus are identified [with it]‘.
Muslim reactions to the shuddhi campaign – ii. The success of the Aryas in their campaign among the Malkanas led them on to attempt to spread their work among several other neo-Muslim groups in northern India, including Muslim Jat, Gujjar and Rajput communities in the Punjab and the United Provinces. Soon, appeals began being issued calling for the shuddhi of virtually all the Muslims of India. At a public rally in Lahore, Shraddhanand delivered a fiery speech, appealing to the Hindus to convert to the Hindu fold 65 million Indian Muslims. Bhaskarteertha, the Sanatani Shankaracharya of the Sharada Peetha, went even further and declared that barring ‘a few hundred thousand’ Indian Muslims whose forefathers had come from ‘Afghanistan and Baluchistan’, the rest of the Muslims of the country were descendants of Hindu converts and that they should, therefore, be all made Hindu once again.
The Muslim reaction to the prospect of mass desertions of large numbers of only partially-Islamised Muslims, perhaps the majority of the Indian Muslim population, to the Hindu fold, was, naturally, one of shock and panic. Leading Muslims now appealed for frantic efforts to be made to rescue the Malkanas, to prevent further conversions to ‘Hinduism’, and even to begin counter-missionary drives among the Hindus themselves. They were unanimous in asserting that the need of the hour was to launch an India-wide missionary drive, to purge Muslim groups of what were seen as their Hinduistic customs, to spread awareness about the teachings of Islam among them and to bring their practices and life-styles in conformity with the Islamic law [shar'iat] and thereby create clear boundaries between Muslims and others, to prevent Muslims from easily being absorbed into the Hindu fold. As a leading Deobandi ‘alim of the Jami’at-ul Ulama-i-Hind asserted, the need of the hour was to ‘dye the Hinduistic society [hinduana mu'ashrat] deep with the colour of the culture of the Hijaz’.
Mendicants and blind beggars should sing Islamic songs while asking for alms. This strategy promises to be particularly effective, because, Nizami says, ‘In India song and music have a far more powerful effect than lectures and sermons’. Muslim writers should write tracts on methods of tabligh as well as stories about the brave feats of the Muslims. The latter, Nizami says, will have a special appeal for ‘martial groups’ such as the Rajputs.Nizami set up the Nizamia Sufi Mission to carry out his tablighi project. He does not, however, seem to have met with much success. More fruitful, however, were the efforts of Islamic groups opposed to the popular Sufism that Nizami represented. Such, for instance, was the Tablighi Jama’at, launched by a Deobandi ‘alim, Maulana Muhammad Ilyas in 1925, and which today has emerged as the single largest Islamic movement in the world, active in almost every country. The launching of the Tablighi Jama’at was a direct fall-out of the Arya shuddhi campaign. Apprehensive that the Meos of Mewat, a nominally Islamised group living in the vicinity of the Malkana belt, would also fall prey to the Aryas, Ilyas began a campaign aiming at what he saw as their fuller ‘Islamisation’. He instructed the Meos to give up their Hindu practices and beliefs and to strictly abide by the shari’at in their daily lives. Meo villagers, who hardly had any knowledge of Islam and whose practices were scarcely different from those of their non-Muslim neighbours, were formed into groups [jama'ats] and despatched to Deobandi madrasas in the western United Provinces and Delhi, there to learn the basics of Islam, such as the creed of confession and the five ritual prayers, from leading ‘ulama. On their return to Mewat, they transmitted this knowledge to their kinsmen, and exhorted them to join the jama’ats as well. Great rewards in heaven [sawab] were promised in return for this. According to Tablighi Jama’at sources, in a few years after the launching of Ilyas’ campaign, most Meos had given up worshipping at Hindu shrines, wearing Hindu-style clothes and sporting Hindu names.Like Nizami and Ilyas, other Muslim ideologues argued for the ‘ulama and Sufi divines to play a leading role in spearheading the tabligh counter-offensive. The Jamiat-ul Ulama-i-Hind, an organisation of leading, largely Deobandi ‘ulama, called for the setting up of a chain of madrasas all over the country to impart Islamic education to ordinary Muslims to prevent them from falling into the clutches of the Aryas. ‘No number of madrasas is too much, and nor is any amount of money to be spent on them’, declared Maulana Muhammad ‘Abdul Halim Siddiqui, the treasurer of the Department for the Propagation and Protection of Islam, set up by the Jami’at in 1923 in the wake of the shuddhi campaign among the Malkanas. A similar demand was voiced by the leading ‘alim of the Firangi Mahal madrasa of Lucknow, Maulana ‘Abdul Bari, who called for Sufi preceptors to instruct their disciples to form teams and tour the countryside preaching Islam to neo-Muslim groups. These teams would include, besides Muslim scholars, individuals with a good knowledge of medicine who would administer to the sick and thus play an important role in spreading Islam among non-Muslims.
This focus on spreading Islamic knowledge among the Muslims to combat the threat of the Aryas emerges as particularly salient in the writings of the period of one of the leading Islamic ideologues in recent South Asian history, Maulana Sayyed Abul A’la Maududi, who was later to go on to found the Jama’at-i-Islami. In a series of articles in 1925 of Al-Jami’at, the official organ of the Jami’at-ul Ulama-i-Hind, of which he was then the editor, Maududi argued the case for a more activist and broad-based tabligh campaign that fitted in with his own understanding of Islam as an all-embracing ideology that covered every aspect of life. Maududi stressed that the success of the Arya campaign was but a reflection and a consequence of Muslims having forgotten what he calls ‘the fundamental aim’ of a Muslim’s life and existence–the establishment of Islam in its entirety in accordance with the Will of God, through constant engagement in its tabligh, inviting others to the Truth. ‘The entire life of the Prophet Muhammad’, he wrote, ‘was a manifestation of this da’awat-i-haq [Invitation to the Truth']‘, and Muslims must follow in his footsteps. A Muslim’s entire life, he stressed, is a form of tabligh. For a Muslim to fulfil this divine mission, he or she must have at least a modicum of knowledge of Islam. Further, he or she must be a self-conscious believer. It is not enough, Maududi says, for someone to claim to be a Muslim simply because of birth in a Muslim family. The tablighi project of spreading knowledge of Islam among Muslims, Maududi suggests, must also be accompanied by efforts at social
reform on the lines of the shari’at. In particular, social inequalities and caste-like features within the Muslim community, taking advantage of which the Aryas had managed to make considerable headway in their shuddhi campaign, must be combatted. In this way, what Maududi calls for is a consolidated, homogenous, well-defined and closely-knit Muslim community, defined and set apart from the others by strict observance to the shar’iat.
Conclusion
The Arya shuddhi offensive was thus seen as a grave challenge by Muslim leaders, who responded to it by advocating a grand community-wide effort of Islamic reform, reaching out to hitherto neglected neo-Muslim groups, seeking to draw them into the fold of the emerging pan-Indian Muslim community, united on the basis of allegiance to common beliefs and ritual practices. In the changed socio-political context, ordinary people thus assumed far greater importance in elite-led mobilisational projects than they had hitherto been. In the process, individual Muslims, no matter how humble their station in life, were now seen as crucial symbols and representatives of Islam, assuming the place that the Muslim ruler had traditionally enjoyed. Tabligh and the defence of Islam as a duty of all Muslims, men and women, whatever their social position. Yogi Sikand
This article has been written by Bangaldeshi patriot Barrister MBI Munshi who lives is Dhaka Bangladesh. Dr. Munshi has written a seminal book on South Asia called “The India Doctrine”. Barrister Munshi is very active on India, Pakistani and Bangladeshi defense forums. He was kind enough to send me his book to review and has promised to use some of our articles in the next edition of his book. Dr. Munshi has a keen sense of history and brings out the forgotten history of 1971 lost in Bollywoods popcorn culture. The new generation of South Asians do not remember the dark times of 1975 when a dark cloud engulfed Bangladesh.
16th December 1971, a new country was born – Bangladesh. As a newborn country, Bangladesh had lots of hopes and aspirations. It was time for the “Father of the Nation” to materialize the dream that he had presented to the people. The liberation war had broken all the class barriers in the society.
A great opportunity was created to forge a national unity leaving aside the age-old class differentiations. The people expected that the leaders would rise above the group and party interest and would unite the people to harness their patriotism and productivities to rebuild the war torn country to fulfill the dream of a ‘Golden Bengal’. 100 millions of Bangladeshis would find their rightful place in the world community with dignity and honour.
After failing to take over Bangladesh on Dec 16th 1971, India unleashed the Rakhi Bahni on the Bangladeshis. It then tried to impose a Treaty of Friendship which would have converted into an Indian province. On August 14th 1975 Bangladeshi patriots killed the Indian agent Shaikh Mujib and liberated Bangladesh from the Indian grip. Today India is forcing a transit policy on defenseless Bangladesh that is fighting for her existence. The Transit facilites that Bharat is asking would clog existing Balgladeshi roads and pose a security threat to Bangladesh. It would also exacerbate the situation in Northeast "India" where the sevean Assamese states want freedom from Delhi. The Transit agreement poses a mortal threat to Bangladesh
Historical heritage, distinct self identity, the vision of the able leadership, right direction, patriotism, sacrifices, hard work and above all united efforts of the nation could achieve cherished goal step by step with the passage of time. Creation of a progressive, happy and prosperous Bangladesh and reaching its fruits at the doorstep of every citizen would have matched with the spirit of the liberation war. The independence would have then become meaningful. But the people had already become apprehensive about the sincerity of the leadership.
Mujib Ur Rehman March 1971: Soon after stepping on the soil of the independent country Awami League came out with the ambiguous slogan of “Mujibbad”. After three and half years when “Mujibbad” was proven to be an empty slogan Sheikh Mujibur Rahman like any other power hungry dictator promulgated 4th amendment and took all powers in his own hand by forming one party autocratic regime of BKSAL. This unprecedented constitutional coup de’ tat was called his ‘Second Revolution’. As he usurped absolute power apparently things for a while looked calm on the surface but beneath that uneasy calm political and social conditions were fast deteriorating.
Our political leaders had always done much sweet-talking than actual deeds. Promises had been even greater. People have heard such for ages and got used to such empty promises. Who ever had gone to power had always failed the people. They had oppressed the people paying no heed to their demands. The isolation of the leaders from the people and their selfish interest were the main reasons for such betrayals.
Our leaders mostly are alien in their own societies. That is why people are apathetic toward them. Once in power they do everything to meet their own vested interest and later justify their deeds with power and position. The people remain enslaved in the merry go round of betrayal and deception. The politicians always placed their self-interest above the interest of the nation. Even at times the country and the people became sacrificial goats to meet their greed and lust.
Bangladesh 14th August 1975: Bengali patirots killed Shaikh Mujib who was seen as an Indian agent and a sell out to Delhi. Bangaldeshis revolted against the Indian imposed "Rakhi Bahni" (run by a sitting Indian General) and rose against the so called "Treaty of Freindhsip" whose aim was to absorb Bengal into India. Shaikh Mujib's body lay in the streets of days. It was Awami League of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman that mortgaged the national independence and state sovereignty signing the 25 years long-term unequal treaty with India. By creating Rakkhi Bahini, Lal Bahini, Sheccha Shebok Bahini and other private Bahinis AWAMI-BKSALISTS unleashed an unbearable reign of terror killing 40000 nationalists and patriotic people with out any trial.
Soon after stepping on the soil of the independent country Awami League came out with the ambiguous slogan of “Mujibbad”. After three and half years when “Mujibbad” was proven to be an empty slogan Sheikh Mujibur Rahman like any other power hungry dictator promulgated 4th amendment and took all powers in his own hand by forming one party autocratic regime of BKSAL. This unprecedented constitutional coup de’ tat was called his ‘Second Revolution’. As he usurped absolute power apparently things for a while looked calm on the surface but beneath that uneasy calm political and social conditions were fast deteriorating.
The main reason for such deterioration was the presumption of the rulers that by dishing out favours and benefits rule can be perpetuated forever. They depended on this belief because of their lake of understanding of the complexities of the newly independent country. It’s problems and solutions were beyond their perception. They lacked any ideology, conviction, experience and vision. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman like other third world dictators considered his own ideas and thoughts to be the ultimate. He never cared to take any advice or suggestion from any one, other than his ‘kitchen cabinet’ comprised of his family members. His all knowing attitudes were to a great extend responsible for his administrative failure.
He also did not have a clear idea about the difference between party and the state. This became clear even in 1956-57 when he deferred with the then Chief Minister Mr. Ataur Rahman Khan. Mr. Khan wanted to keep the administration totally neutral. He knew that if the administration were brought under the party control then it would be difficult to run the administration efficiently. But Sheikh Mujib refuted his contention and said, “The administration has to accept party domination. Not only that administration will just help and assist the party to execute its policies, but the administration will also be helping in increasing its influence among the people”. Mr. Ataur Rahman Khan had to surrender to Sheikh Mujib as he was then considered very powerful in the party. Thus during this time Sheikh Mujibur Rahman as the Minister of Commerce and Industries indulged in rampant corruption, nepotism and misuse of power. He used his power in giving out permits, licenses, bank loans, and sanction to establish industries to people who were loyal to him and his cronies.
Mujib Ur Rehman to be tried. Bangladesh: The general Secretaries nominated were most trusted confidants of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. The members of the central committees of these organizations consisted of members taken from CPB, NAP Muzaffar and Jatiyo league of Ataur Rahman Khan.
After taking over the reign of Bangladesh he started ruling the country in the same old style. Some were given money, some undue promotions, appointments as the directors of the abandoned business concerns and industries, license permits, dealerships etc. to buy support and personal loyalty. This is how only within two and half years a total anarchy was created in the economic sector.
Shaikh Mujib Ur Rahman and the CIA seen here in the 60s with the CIA: He had worked closely with the CIA and RAW for self agrandisement as the leader of a new nation.: It was not only his party people who got involved in rampant corruption. His immediate family members were also involved. Gazi Golam Mustfa who was a close confidant of Sheik’s family became famous as ‘Kamble Chor’ in the country for his open misappropriation of relief goods being the Chairman of the Red Cross. The donors and the international relief agencies also came to know about his malpractices.
Many of his confidants were also involved in smuggling in collaboration with the Marwaris. Thus under the patronization of Awami rule a new class of ‘novo’ rich grew like mushroom. They accumulated from national resources but did not reinvest into the economic cycle. Most of their wealth was spent in non-productive sectors or transferred abroad. With these people Sheikh Mujibur Rahman wanted to establish ‘GOLDEN BENGAL’ in the country. It was really very hard to understand what he was up to? Was it his ignorance or cunning mechanization? Was it appropriate that he should place his party’s interest over the national interest? Did the nation expect that from him?
It was not only his party people who got involved in rampant corruption. His immediate family members were also involved. Gazi Golam Mustfa who was a close confidant of Sheik’s family became famous as ‘Kamble Chor’ in the country for his open misappropriation of relief goods being the Chairman of the Red Cross. The donors and the international relief agencies also came to know about his malpractices.
International press and media became very vocal against this notorious thief. His only brother Sheikh Naser not only garbed the abandoned properties and businesses in Khulna his hometown, but also became one of the ringleaders of the smuggling activities. All his nephews Sheikh Moni, Abul Hasnat, Sheikh Shahidul Islam not only became politically very powerful, they also amassed enormous wealth under the patronization of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. His sons, particularly Sheikh Kamal also got involved in amassing fortunes and other unethical activities such as Bank robberies.
Regarding the state of corruption during Mujib’s regime, the reputed journalist Lawrence Lift Shulz wrote in the Far Eastern Economic Review on 30th Aug 1974. “Corruption and malpractices are nothing new. But people of Dhaka thinks the way the corruption and malpractices and plunder of national wealth that had taken place during Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s regime is unprecedented”.
It was virtually impossible for the government to gain any economic or political achievements with such loots and plunders in a newly independent war ravaged country. The looters did not plough back their ill-gotten wealth in the national economy; they spent that fortune for their luxuries and comforts. But the government had to pay heavily as its image got tarnished in the eyes of the people and the world.
Mujib declared himself dictator for life: AWAMI-BAKSAL period is the dark chapter in the history of Bangladesh. Volumes would not be enough to write the full history. On Jan. 25, 1975 with a stroke of pen Sheikh Mujibur Rahman killed democracy and imposed on the nation the yoke of one party rule of BAKSAL. He snatched away from the people freedom of press, freedom of expression, fundamental rights along with all political rights. All national dailies and periodicals were banned except 4 government-controlled dailies. Constitutional rights of the judiciary were also high jacked and was brought under the administrative control. Rule of law thus was buried. Sheik Mujib and his government presented the people fascism in the name of democracy, social injustice in the name of socialism, national disunity in the name of Bengali nationalism and communal disharmony in the name of secularism. In this way after subjugating the whole nation in a state of gasping suffocation all the opposition was crushed systematically through state terrorism with a view to close all the constitutional and democratic avenues to bring any change of government. The nation was thrown into an era of total darkness with no hope to breathe afresh.
The government became isolated from the people. Against the promise to turn Bangladesh into ‘Golden Bengal’ the ruling elites turned Bangladesh into a “bottom less basket”. The common people viewed this as a national betrayal. They became dejected with the Awami League leadership. Awami League lost the people’s support, which was so vital for any government to govern. Gradually they also lost the support of many powerful quarters within the government itself. Their support within the students, youths and armed forces eroded substantially.
An agricultural country Bangladesh is heavily dependent on the nature. It was a gigantic task to feed 100 millions people in a devastated country. The donors and the international communities came forward generously to help Bangladesh in its reconstruction. Till 30th December 1973 Bangladesh received grants and aid credit amounting 1.4 billion US Dollars. Beside through UNROB huge amount of relief assistance was also provided. In spite of this all the hopes and aspirations of the newly independent nation got lost into the nightmare of AWAMI-BKSAL miss rule.
AWAMI-BAKSAL period is the dark chapter in the history of Bangladesh. Volumes would not be enough to write the full history. On Jan. 25, 1975 with a stroke of pen Sheikh Mujibur Rahman killed democracy and imposed on the nation the yoke of one party rule of BAKSAL. He snatched away from the people freedom of press, freedom of expression, fundamental rights along with all political rights. All national dailies and periodicals were banned except 4 government-controlled dailies. Constitutional rights of the judiciary were also high jacked and was brought under the administrative control. Rule of law thus was buried.
The period of AWAMI-BKSAL rule was full of barbaric atrocities. The history of AWAMI-BKSAL rule was basically history of murder, rape, loot, oppression, plunder, famine, capitulation to the foreign exploiters, white terror and above all betrayal to the spirit of the liberation war. People could never be able to forget those horrifying memories. In the name of socialism they plundered the national wealth, they kept the border open for the smuggling, for their mismanagement of the economy the country got recognized internationally as the ‘bottomless basket’. There was no famine in Bangladesh during or just after the war but hundreds and thousands of people had to die out of the man made famine of’74 during the rule of AWAMI-BKSAL.
Sheik Mujib and his government presented the people fascism in the name of democracy, social injustice in the name of socialism, national disunity in the name of Bengali nationalism and communal disharmony in the name of secularism. In this way after subjugating the whole nation in a state of gasping suffocation all the opposition was crushed systematically through state terrorism with a view to close all the constitutional and democratic avenues to bring any change of government. The nation was thrown into an era of total darkness with no hope to breathe afresh.
Treaty of friendship with India March 19 1972: Sheik Mujib and his government presented the people fascism in the name of democracy, social injustice in the name of socialism, national disunity in the name of Bengali nationalism and communal disharmony in the name of secularism. In this way after subjugating the whole nation in a state of gasping suffocation all the opposition was crushed systematically through state terrorism with a view to close all the constitutional and democratic avenues to bring any change of government. The nation was thrown into an era of total darkness with no hope to breathe afresh. It was Awami League of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman that mortgaged the national independence and state sovereignty signing the 25 years long-term unequal treaty with India. By creating Rakkhi Bahini, Lal Bahini, Sheccha Shebok Bahini and other private Bahinis AWAMI-BKSALISTS unleashed an unbearable reign of terror killing 40000 nationalists and patriotic people with out any trial.
It was Awami League of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman that mortgaged the national independence and state sovereignty signing the 25 years long-term unequal treaty with India. By creating Rakkhi Bahini, Lal Bahini, Sheccha Shebok Bahini and other private Bahinis AWAMI-BKSALISTS unleashed an unbearable reign of terror killing 40000 nationalists and patriotic people with out any trial.
On 24th Feb 1975 President Sheikh Mujibur Rahman through a decree announced formation of the only political party of the country Bangladesh Krishak Sramik Awami League or BKSAL. He also declared himself to be the chairman of BKSAL. In the 3rd article of the announcement it was stated, “Till any further order from the President all the members of the Parliament of the defunct Awami League, all its members, Cabinet Ministers, deputy Ministers, state Ministers will be considered as the members of the BKSAL. Bongo Bir Gen. Osmani and Barrister Mainul Hossain decided to defy this order and not to join BKSAL instead they both resigned from their Parliament membership.
Due to the announcement of the so-called ‘national party’ all other political parties got abolished. Finally CPB, NAP Muzaffar and Awami League got merged into BKSAL. Out of the 8 opposition members in the Parliament 4 joined BKSAL.
On 6th June 1975 the organizational structure and the constitution of BKSAL was announced. That day names of 115 members central committee were announced. In that 115 members– vice President, Prime Minister, speaker, deputy speaker, Ministers, deputy Ministers, state Ministers, 3 Chiefs of the army, navy and airforce, DG BDR, DG JRB and the secretaries of all the ministries were included.
The Executive Committee of BKSAL
(1) Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, (2) Sayed Nazrul Islam, (3) Mansoor Ali, (4) Khandakar Mushtaq Ahmed, (5) Abdul Hasnat Mohammad Kamruzzaman, (6) Abdul Malek Ukil (7) Prof. Yusuf Ali, (8) Manaranjan Dhar, (9) Mohiuddin Ahmed, (10) Gazi Golam Mustafa, (11) Zillur Rahman, (12) Sheikh Fazlul Haq Moni, (13) Abdur Razzak.
List of the Central Committee of BKSAL
(1) Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, (2) Sayed Nazrul Islam, (3) Mansoor Ali, (4) Abdul Malik Ukil, (5) Khandakar Mushtaq Ahmad, (6) A.H.M Kamaruzzaman, (7) Mahmudullah, (8) Abdus Samad Azad, (9) Yusuf Ali, (10) Fani Bhushan Majumder, (11) Dr. Kamal Hussain, (12) Sohrab Hussain, (13) Abdul Mannan, (14) Abdur Rab Shernyabat, (15) Manaranjan Dhar, (16) Abdul Matin, (17) Asaduzzanan, (18) Korban Ali, (19) Dr. Azizul Rahman Mallik, (20) Dr. Mozzaffar Ahmad Choudhury, (21) Tofayel Ahmad, (22) Shah Moazzam Hossain, (23) Abdul Momen Talukder, (24) Dewan Farid Ganj, (25) Professor Nurul Islam Choudhry, (26) Taher uddin Thakur, (27) Moslemuddin Khan, (28) MD Nurul Islam Manju, (29) AKM Obaidur Rahman, (30) Dr. Khitish Chandra Mandal. (31) Reazuddin Ahmad, (32) M. Baitullah, (33) Rahul Quddus(Secretary), (34) Zillur Rahman, (35) Mohiuddin Ahmad MP, (36) Sheikh Fazlul Haq Moin, (37) Abdur Razzaq, (38) Sheikh Shahidul Islam, (39) Anwar Choudhry, (40) Sajeda Choudhry, (41) Taslema Abed, (42) Abdur Rahim, (43) Abdul Awal, (44) Lutfur Rahman, (45) A.K. Muzibur Rahman, (46) Dr. Mofiz Choudhry, (47) Dr. Allauddin, (48) Dr. Ahsanul Haq, (49) Raushan Ali, (50) Azizur Rahman Akkas, (51) Sheikh Abdul Aziz, (52) Salahuddin Yusuf, (53) Michale Shushil Adhikari, (54) Kazi Abdul Hakim, (55) Mollah Jalaluddin, (56) Shamsuddin Mollah, (57) Gaur Chandra Bala, (58) Gazi Ghulam Mustafa, (59) Shamsul Haq, (60) Shamsuzzoha, (61) Rafiqueuddin Bhuiya, (62) Syed Ahmad, (63) Shamsur Rahman Khan, (64) Nurul Haq, (65) Kazi Zahurul Qayyum, (66) Capt.(Retd) Sujjat Ali, (67) M.R. Siddiqui, (68) MA Wahab, (69) Chittaranjan Sutar, (70) Sayeda Razia Banu, (71) Ataur Rahman Khan, (72) Khandakar Muhammad Illyas, (73) Mong Pru Saire, (74) Professor Muzzafar Ahmad, (75) Ataur Rahman, (76) Pir Habibur Rahman, (77) Sayeed Altaf Hussain, (78) Muhammad Farhad, (79) Motia Choudhury. (80) Hazi Danesh, (81) Taufiq Inam(Secretary), (82) Nurul Islam(Secretary), (83) Fayezuddin (Secretary), (84) Mahbubur Rahman(Secretary), (85) Abdul Khaleque, (86) Muzibul Haq (Secretary), (87) Abdur Rahim(Secretary), (88) Moinul Islam (Secretary), (89) Sayeeduzzaman(Secretary), (90) Anisuzzaman(Secretary), (91) Dr. A Sattar (Secretary), (92) M.A Samad(Secretary), (93) Abu Tahir (Secretary), (94) Al Hossaini (Secretary), (95) Dr Tajul Hossain(Secretary), (96) Motiur Rahman. Chairman. TCB, (97) Maj. Gen K.M. Safiullah, (98) Air Vice Marshal Khandakar, (99) Comodore M.H.Khan, (100) Maj Gen. Khalilur Rahman, (101) A.K. Naziruddin, (102) Dr. Abdul Matin Choudhury, (103) Dr.Mazharul Islam, (104) Dr.Sramul Haq, (105) ATM Syed Hossain, (106) Nurul Islam, (107) Dr. Nilima Ibrahim, (108) Dr. Nurul Islam PG Hospital, (109) Obaidul Haq Eiditor Observer, (110) Anwar Hossain Manju Editor Ittefaq, (111) Mizanur Rahman BPI, (112) Manawarul Islam, (113) Brig. A.M.S. Nuruzzaman DG Jatiyo Rakki Bahini, (114) Kamruzzaman teachers Association, (115) Dr. Mazhar Ali Kadri.
In the same declaration 5 sister organisation of BKSAL were also formed:-
General Secretaries
Jatiyo Krishak league Fani Bhushan Majumdar
Jatiyo Sramik league Professor. Yousuf Ali
Jatiyo Mahila league Sajeda Choudhury
Jatiyo Jubo league Tofayel Ahmed
Jatiyo Chattra league Sheikh Shahidul Islam.
The general Secretaries nominated were most trusted confidants of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. The members of the central committees of these organizations consisted of members taken from CPB, NAP Muzaffar and Jatiyo league of Ataur Rahman Khan.
In accordance with forming of BKSAL on 16th June 1975, News Paper Cancellation Act was promulgated. Under this Act only four nationalized dailies were allowed to be published along with a few weeklies. Rests were all banned.
Thus after complete burial of democracy the whole country was subjugated under unprecedented reign of white terror. Being denied of personal security the people was suffocated and became hostages in their own homeland under the tyranny of the autocratic BKSAL rule. The political leaders and workers alike miserably failed to grasp the famous doctrine, “Of the people, by the people and for the people.” Thus people could not achieve their cherished dream in spite of their glorious straggle and sacrifice. All their efforts had got lost once again in the blind alley because of the betrayal of the leadership. Sunday, August 10, 2008 On why Sheikh Mujibur Rahman will not be mourned – From Awami League to BAKSAL Azizul Karim, Canada
Communal riots in 1947: Who were the architects & why?
Tracing the roots of the 1947 riots:The roots of the riots in 1947 date back to 1906:
At the request of the Muslims of Bengal, in 1905, Lord Curzon announced the partition of Bengal. It was the beginning of of the Muslim awakening from the long slumber of self-pity and “reveling in the glory of yester year“. The British wanted to divide Bengal, to allow the Muslims some sense of self rule. Partition of Bengal’s implications for Bangladesh & Pakistan then and now
Map of Bengal 1906: THe partition of Bengal and the riots
The Muslims formed a majority in all of Bengal (which included Bengal, Bihar and Orissa). East Bengal, present day Bangladesh was a Muslim Majority area and West Bengal at that time included both present day Orissa and Bihar where also Bengalis would become minorities. Bengal was the epi-centre of Indian Nationalism. Bengali ideas influenced whole of India. The Muslim Bengalis Waqar ul Mulk, Mohsin ul Mulk had led a campaign for Muslim rights.
According to the 1941 census 53.4 per cent of the Bengalis were Muslims and the rest Hindus, with a minuscule proportion of Buddhists and Christians thrown in. The province was divided into five administrative divisions, which were further subdivided into districts, as follows : Presidency division, consisting of the districts of 24-Parganas, Nadia, Murshidabad, Jessore and Khulna and the Presidency town of Calcutta ; Burdwan division, with the districts of Howrah, Hooghly, Midnapore, Bankura, Burdwan and Birbhum ; Rajshahi division, with the districts of Rajshahi, Pabna, Malda, Dinajpur, Bogra, Rangpur, Jalpaiguri and Darjeeling ; Dacca division, with the districts of Dacca, Faridpur, Barisal and Mymensingh (the largest district in British India) ; and Chittagong division with the districts of Chittagong, Chittagong Hill Tracts, Noakhali and Tipperah. Apart from these districts of Bengal, the people of Sylhet district of Assam, adjoining the Tipperah and Mymensingh districts of Bengal, those of the princely state of Cooch Behar adjoining Jalpaiguri and Rangpur, and a large number among the people of the princely state of Tripura, and among those of the districts of Manbhum nad Singhbhum in Bihar also largely spoke Bangla, and therefore were Bengalis. A map of the erstwhile province of Bengal, as it existed till the midnight of 14th August 1947 is at Fig. 1. The Bangla-speaking areas outside Bengal are also shown in the same map.
There was a vague and unofficial division of the province into three parts : East, West and North. West included the Presidency and Burdwan divisions ; North, the Rajshahi division ; and East, the Dacca and Chittagong divisions. There were substantial differences in the geography and the culture of the three parts. The West, particularly Burdwan division, had no navigable rivers, and some parts of the division were semi-arid ; however, the division had very large reserves of coal in its Ranigunge coalfields which had sired a large number of heavy industries in the region, including an integrated steel plant at Burnpur. The North was bounded by two great rivers, Padma and Jamuna (different from the Jumna or Yamuna which flows by Delhi and Agra ; this Jamuna is the Bengali incarnation of the mighty Brahmaputra of Assam). The region was criss-crossed by a number of swift-flowing tributaries of the two rivers. The East, as opposed to the two, was a low-lying flood plain, being a delta created by three huge rivers : Ganga, a snow-fed river, rechristened after entering Bengal as Padma; Brahmaputra, ditto, Jamuna ; and Meghna, a short but wide river fed only by rain, but from some of the rainiest places in the world, including Cherrapunjee. Certainly the major rivers, and practically all their tributaries and distributaries were navigable right through the year. In fact the usual means of locomotion in British East Bengal used to be the country boat, the nouka.
To oppose the partition in 1906, Swadeshi movement came into action. The RSS already mobilized used this as an excuse to create mayhem. Under presrrue of the Swadeshi movement and Hindu mahasaba Lord Curzon cancelled the partition of Bengal.
Communal riots in 1947: Who were the architects & why? Mohammad Zainal Abedinnoazabd@gmail.com
I had the opportunity to go through the write-up of Tilak R. Sikri in the Washington Post captioned “”India’s Survivors of Partition Begin to Break Long Silence” that referred to the untold sufferings of the people who were the victims of communal riots that made millions of people homeless and hundreds of thousands of
them killed. In recalling the fateful scar of communal riot he mentioned how the Hindus suffered, but he did not mention what happened to the Muslims who suffered more tragically, as they (Muslims) were minority and the victims of the Hindus and their Sikh allies in Punjab. Tilkar failed to mention who were the
masterminds of that communal riot that made the partition of the subcontinent inevitable.
Muslims, even their leader Mohammad Ali Jinnah, could be happy if the subcontinent remained undivided. They opted for a separate homeland for the Muslims when Hindu leaders denied to provide equitable rights to Muslims in independent India.
Hindu leaders agreed on partition of the subcontinent, as they thought and hoped that the dismemberment of India would be a temporary arrangement and reunification of India was a matter of time. History says that the riot of 1947 was masterminded to divide Bengal and Punjab, which were Muslim majority provinces at that time. Riots would not have occurred if they were not politically motivated. Neither innocent people would have been displaced or massacred; if Nehru, India’s first Prime Minister and his preceptor Gandhi would not had set a pre-condition that division of India “must mean a division also of Bengal and Punjab.” (See Nehru’s letter written on May 23, 1947, to Ashraffuddin Ahmad Chowdhury, the Congress President of Tripura, now Comilla, and district.) Nehru also did not keep secret the goal of his demand.
He in the same letter informed Ashraffuddin, “That is the only way to have a United India soon after. If we have a United India straightway, without such division that will, of course be very welcome.”
It is known to all that the Sikhs of Punjab and the Bengalees of Bengal wanted to have independent Punjab and Bengal. Sikhs of the Punjab were incited to stand against the Muslims and they were instigated that they would become the slaves of the Muslims if they would side with the Muslims for an independent sovereign Punjab, as the Muslims were slightly Majority over the Sikh in Punjab. Hindus joined hand with the Sikhs in anti-Muslim riot in Punjab. In this way division of Punjab was made inevitable.
When a joint movement of the Bengalee Hindus and Muslims in favour of United Independent Bengal got momentum, both Gandhi and Nehru vehemently opposed the idea. To break the unity of the Bengalee
Muslims and the Hindus Nehru and his disciples warned that Muslims would dominate the Hindus, if Bengal remained undivided. They demanded that Hindu majority region of Bengal Must merge with
India. Nehru publicly declared, each village, even each house of Bengal would have to be divided on communal line. To disunite the Bengalee Muslims and the Hindus and deter the emergence of United
Independent Bengal communal riots were masterminded.
It is easily understandable who were behind the riots of 1947. There were originated due to anti-Muslim communal feelings of the anti-Muslim cliques. Hundreds of thousands of anti-Muslim riots that occurred in India since 1947 unequivocally justify who were and are communal and terrorists. Tilak though in his write-up condemned communal riot, utterly failed to rise above his communal feelings, which was amply exposed in his writing.
Quaid’s message first delivered on 24th of October 1947, still inspirational, motivational and thought-provoking for the Pakistani Nation
“God often tests and tries those whom he loves. He called upon Prophet Ibrahim to sacrifice the object he loved most. Ibrahim answered the call and offered to sacrifice his son. Today too, God is testing and trying the Muslims of Pakistan and India. He has demanded great sacrifices from us. Our new-born State is bleeding from wounds inflicted by our enemies. Our Muslim brethren in India are being victimized and oppressed as Muslims for their help and sympathy for the establishment of Pakistan. Dark clouds surround us on all sides for the moment but we are not daunted, for I am sure, if we show the same spirit of sacrifice as was shown by Ibrahim, God would rend the clouds and shower on us His blessing as He did on Ibrahim. Let us, therefore, on the day of Eid-ul-Azha which symbolizes the spirit of sacrifice enjoined by Islam, resolve that we shall not be deterred from our objective of creating a State of our own concept by any amount of sacrifice, trials or tribulations which may lie ahead of us and that we shall bend all our energies and resources to achieve our goal. I am confident that in spite of its magnitude, we shall overcome this grave crisis as we have in our long history surmounted many others and notwithstanding the efforts of our enemies, we shall emerge triumphant and strong from the dark night of suffering and show the world that the State exists not for life but for good life.
On this sacred day, I send greetings to our Muslim brethren all over the world both on behalf of myself and the people of Pakistan. For us Pakistan, on this day of thanksgiving and rejoicing, has been overshadowed by the suffering and sorrow of 5 million Muslims in East Punjab and its neighborhood. I hope that, wherever Muslim men and women foregather on this solemn day. They will remember in their prayers these unfortunate men, women and children who have lost their dear ones, homes and hearths and are undergoing an agony and suffering as great hand cruel as any yet inflicted on humanity. In the name of this mass of suffering humanity I renew my appeal to Muslims wherever they may be, to extend to us in this hour of our danger and need, their hand of brotherly sympathy, support and co-operation. Nothing on earth now can undo Pakistan.
The greater the sacrifices are made the purer and more chastened shall we emerge like gold from fire.
So my message to you all is of hope, courage and confidence. Let us mobilize all our resources in a systematic and organized way and tackle the grave issues that confront us with grim determination and discipline worthy of a great nation.
Mohammad Ali Jinnah after winning the elections, and as “the sole spokesman” of all the Muslims of the South Asian Subcontinent fought for and got the British to agree to Separate Electorate for the Muslims. This gave the Muslims tremendous clout in the political spectrum of South Asian Asia politics. Mohammad Ali Jinnah and nurtured and brought in Dr. Ambedakar into the parliament and convinced him to demand separate electorate for the Dalits and Untouchables. Dr. Ambedkar compared the hatred against the Scheduled Castes with apartheid and antisemitism.
Dr. Ambedkar was a protege of Jinnah and Jinnah nurtured him. In the case of Ambedkar, there has been marked response in his life after meeting the different leaders. After meeting Jinnah in January 1940 along with Periyar, Ambedkar became more confident and reassured. Ambedkar, Periyar and Jinnah on Januay 9, 1940: Mohammad Ali Jinnah courted, mentored and helped Dr. Ambedkar get elected. He strived for a Muslim-Dalit coaltion that would have given them the majoirty. The Muslims of Bharat must reach out to the Dalits, form alliances with them, and liberate them from Untouchability through Islam
The Hindu Civilisation…. is a diabolical contrivance to suppress and enslave humanity. Its proper name would be infamy. What else can be said of a civilisation which has produced a mass of people… who are treated as an entity beyond human intercourse and whose mere touch is enough to cause pollution?
Dr. Ambedakar got the concession for separate electorate from the British. When Mohandas Gandhi– a very strong supporter of the caste system and Untenability– heard about the British acceptance o f separate electorate, he went into a tizzy fit. The Hindu mahasabah threatened mass massacres of the Dalits. The enslaved Untouchables were harassed to no end all across the land. Mr. Gandhi went into a fast unto death to blackmail Dr. Ambedkar. Finally Dr. Ambedkar gave in to the pressure, and surrendered the rights of the Dalites. He said that this was the biggest blunder of his life. The Dalits still remain oppressed because of the lack of separate electorate for them. Ambedkar was a fierce critic of Mohandas Gandhi and the Indian National Congress.
Ambedkar had become one of the most prominent untouchable political figures of the time. He had grown increasingly critical of mainstream Indian political parties for their perceived lack of emphasis for the elimination of the caste system. Ambedkar criticized the Indian National Congress and its leader Mohandas (Mahatma) Gandhi, whom he accused of reducing the untouchable community to a figure of pathos. Ambedkar was also dissatisfied with the failures of British rule, and advocated a political identity for untouchables separate from both the Congress and the British. At a Depressed Classes Conference on August 8, 1930 Ambedkar outlined his political vision, insisting that the safety of the Depressed Classes hinged on their being independent of the Government and the Congress both:
We must shape our course ourselves and by ourselves… Political power cannot be a panacea for the ills of the Depressed Classes. Their salvation lies in their social elevation. They must cleanse their evil habits. They must improve their bad ways of living…. They must be educated…. There is a great necessity to disturb their pathetic contentment and to instill into them that divine discontent which is the spring of all elevation.[2]
In this speech, Ambedkar criticized the Salt Satyagraha launched by Gandhi and the Congress. Ambedkar’s criticisms and political work had made him very unpopular with orthodox Hindus, as well as with many Congress politicians who had earlier condemned untouchability and worked against discrimination across India. This was largely because these “liberal” politicians usually stopped short of advocating full equality for untouchables.
In 1932, M. C. Rajah concluded a pact with two right-wingers in the Indian National Congress, Dr. B. S. Moonje [4][5] and Jadhav. According to this pact, Moonje offered reserved seats to scheduled castes in return for Rajah’s support. This demand prompted Ambedkar to make an official demand for Separate Electorate System on an all-India basis. Ambedkar’s prominence and popular support amongst the untouchable community had increased, and he was invited to attend the Second Round Table Conference in London in 1931. Here he sparred verbally with Gandhi on the question of awarding separate electorates to untouchables.[2] A fierce opponent of separate electorates on religious and sectarian lines, Gandhi feared that separate electorates for untouchables would divide Hindu society for future generations.
When the British agreed with Ambedkar and announced the awarding of separate electorates, Gandhi began a fast-unto-death while imprisoned in the Yeravada Central Jail of Pune in 1932. Exhorting orthodox Hindu society to eliminate discrimination and untouchability, Gandhi asked for the political and social unity of Hindus. Gandhi’s fast provoked great public support across India, and orthodox Hindu leaders, Congress politicians and activists such as Madan Mohan Malaviya and Palwankar Baloo organized joint meetings with Ambedkar and his supporters at Yeravada. Fearing a communal reprisal and killings of untouchables in the event of Gandhi’s death, Ambedkar agreed under massive coercion from the supporters of Gandhi to drop the demand for separate electorates, and settled for a reservation of seats. This agreement, which saw Gandhi end his fast, in the end achieved more representation for the untouchables, while dropping the demand for separate electorates that was promised through the British Communal Award prior to Ambedkar’s meeting with Gandhi. Ambedkar was to later criticise this fast of Gandhi as a gimmick to deny political rights to the untouchables and increase the coercion he had faced to give up the demand for separate electorates.
This is the main reason 450 million Dalits and Untouchables hate Mohandas Gandhi
Ambedkar died in his sleep on December 6, 1956at his home in Delhi. Since the Caste Hindus denied the cremation at Dadar crematorium, A Buddhist-style cremation was organised for him at Chowpatty beach on December 7, attended by hundreds of thousands of supporters, activists and admirers.
The pre-independence map of 570 states of the Subcontinent. Why would the separation of Pakistan be considered "Partition"? What gave Nehru the right to forcibly absorb Hyberabad, Junagarh, Manvadar and Goa into the Indian Union? Can Bharat also claim Nepal as part of the union? Can Bharat also claim Lanka as part of Bharat, or Burma?
Jaswant Singh is going from pillar to post in an endeavor to sell his books, but also to propagate his vision of “Akhand Bharat” (Greater India). By personifying the glorious struggle of for independence into the body of Mohammad Ali Jinnah, he is trying to convert the ideology of Pakistan into a Greek tragedy–complete with heroes and villains. Mr. Janawant Singh self aggrandisingtours are profitable to his personal ambitions and political career, but the creation of Pakistan (re-birth of the Indus Valley as a Muslim state) is not a page out of Shakuntala. The blunders of Nehru and Gandhi precipitated the constitutional crisis and made the proposals of the Indian National Congress untenable. However reducing the self of loss of the Muslims in a post 1857 world to a personality is the height of arrogance. While Jaswant Singh scores points against the Indian National Congress, he defends the original proponents of the Two Nation theory, Lala Rai, Sarvarkar, Haldiram and Gowalkar.
Mr. Singh asks a lot of questions about the ideology of Pakistan. His sole purpose is to denigrate the entire leadership of the Muslims of South Asia. He eulogizes Jinnah, but he also defends the racism of Rai and the bigotry of Haldiram. This dichotomy in Mr. Singh’sthinking makes one wonder about his true motives about writing the book with a focus on what he calls “partition”.
South Asia was a conglomeration of 570 states. Why isn’t the independence of Burma from the British considered “partition”? Why isn’t the liberation of Lanka also considered “partition”? What about Nepal? At one time the British empire included Nepal. Why isn’t the separation of Hindu Nepal from Bharat considered “partition”? At one point Aden and Iraq were part of the same British “Indian Empire”. Was the independence of Iraq also a cataclysmic “partition” event? What about the French “Indian Empire”? For the French “India” included parts of present day “India”, but it also included Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. Why isn’t the independence of Vietnam considered “partition” of India. The Dutch “India” included parts of present day “India” and the country of Indonesia. If we are to go by the logic of Jaswant Singh, the independence of Indonesia would also be considered “partition”.
This map shows the vision for Pakistan and Bangistan. Quaid e Azam struggled and the Muslims struggles for this solution. Chaudhry Rehmat Ali described the Continent of "Dinia" and dependencies. Ch. Rehmat Ali's map depicted Muslim rule in South Asia after the British left. The Muslim homelands would be carved out of "Dinia". This was the struggle for independence. Rehmat Ali and the Muslims wanted the region returned to Muslim rule as it was before the British arrived
NEW DELHI: One has to understand MohammedAli Jinnah – bothas a man and as a statesman – to understand India’s relationship with Pakistan and Bangladesh, veteran politician and author Jaswant Singh said here Saturday.
“Unless we understand MohammedAli Jinnah as a man and as a statesman, we cannot understand Bangladesh, Pakistan and our relations with the two countries. Nobody has written about Jinnah – whom Mahatma Gandhi described as a great man – the way I have,” Singh told a packed audience comprising writers, journalists, publishers and bureaucrats at the Pragati Maidan here on the inaugural day of the 15th Delhi Book Fair.
Singh, a former defence and finance minister, was expelled from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) earlier this month over his appraisal of the Pakistan founder in his controversial book “Jinnah: India-Partition-Independence”.
The book, which defends Jinnah’s role in the partition of the subcontinent and says he had been “unnecessarily demonised”, has been banned by the BJP government in Gujarat.
At the book fair, Singh was addressing a panel discussion, “Ban on Jaswant Singh’s Book – Jinnah: India-Partition-Independence”.
The panelists included Tushar A Gandhi, grandson of Mahatma Gandhi and head of the Mahatma Gandhi Foundation, Minister of State for Minority Affairs Salman Khursheed, former Karnataka governor TN Chaturvedi and retired Delhi High Court judge CM Nayar. The discussion was moderated by academic and writer Yogesh Atal.
“I have no intention of speaking at a discussion promoting my book at a book fair. It could be construed as self-promotion. Instead, I will speak on the fallout of partition, which prompted me to research the book.Times of India. One has to understand Jinnah to know Pakistan: Jaswant 29 Aug 2009, 2102 hrs IST, IANS
Pre Independence map of British "India". This is the political map of South Asia. The Muslims always saw South Asia as a conglomeration of 570 states--they never saw it as one country. "Akhand Bharat" never existed except in the minds of the Hindu mhasabah bigots. There was no partition. The states on the banks of the Indus decided to continue to live together.
By reducing Jawaharlal Nehru, Jaswant Singh increases the value of the RSS type of thinking. He uses Jinnah as a leverage to downgrade Nehru, however he does not accept any of the things that Mohammad Ali Jinnah stood for. Mr. Jaswant Singh talks about understanding Pakistan, but his book is but a polemic on the Pakistan ideology. Jaswant Singh constantly talks about “partition” as a cataclysmic event, as if “Mother India” ever existed a nation state. South Asia never exsited as a nation state. When the British came to Kokota, there were 570 states in South Asia. When the British left South Asia, there were 570 states plus the dominions of Bharat and Paksitan. In 1947 the states on the Indus decided to continue to live together, just like they had lived together for 5000 years. There was no bond between Mehergarh and Goa. Moenjadarohad no links with Benearas. Harappa was intricatelyliked to Kashmir, but has no connection with Ayudiya. South Asia is as big as Western Europe. Why would Luxembourghook up with Italy, or Liechtenstein be part of Spain. Why would Switzerland be part of Greece?
The journey of Mohammad Ali Jinnah from “the Ambassador of Hindu Muslim Unity to the Quaid e Azam of Pakistan” is a journey of the Muslims of South Asia. Alama Iqbal also went through the same journey. Alama Iqbal typified the Muslim experience–from a “Indian patriot” to a “Pan Islamic thinker” to a “Pakistani”. Today’s Muslims in South Asia have all gone through the same transition.
The British Empire does not even show half of Pakistan. In 1850 this was the British map of South Asia. Only the purple areas belgonged to the East India Company. This map reflects back to the Indus policy of Lord Curzon A previous map would show Afghanistan as part of the empire. This map shows Nepal and parts of Burma as part of "India". Another map also shows Aden and Iraq as part of "India". Why is the independence of Pakistan called "partition" and the independence of Neap, Burma, Lanka, Afghanistan, Iraq from the British Empire not called "partition"
“The original title of my book was very long, ‘Mohammed Ali Jinnah: Journey from an Ambassador of Hindu-Muslim Unity in India to Quaid-e-Azamin Pakistan’. My American publishers did not like it. They are ignorant about Jinnah or India’s partition. They don’t understand Indian history unless you compare it with the American civil war,” Singh maintained.
“Partition has been the most damaging event in modern India. Though I was born in a village far away from Lahore and Sindh, I always wondered how could they ever become foreign lands… and (how) the man (Jinnah) who had so assiduously worked for the 1916 Lucknow Pact could divide the country,” he said.
The 1916 Lucknow Pact between the Muslim League and the Indian National Congress had pressured the British government to give Indians more authority to run the country.
“The takeoff point for my research was 1857 – the mutiny which brought the Hindus and Muslims in the subcontinent together and finally uprooted the British after 90 years, in 1947. The 1857 revolt continued to haunt the British,” Singh said.
“Jinnah set another milestone in communal amity in 1916 with the Lucknow Pact. A man who had lived all his life in India barring the last 13 months and who had been insulted by the British did not have to be demonised by us,” he said.
“India cannot be shackled by its neighbours and unless we become one country, it will be difficult to realise our dreams. We have to cultivate a mindset that allows us to think freely.
“I am grateful that the intellectuals and the publishing world are standing by me to support freedom of thought, that is, the freedom to write. Where the mind is without fear… will heads be held high and there will be freedom,” Singh said, taking a cue from Rabindranath Tagore’s famous lines.Times of India. One has to understand Jinnah to know Pakistan: Jaswant 29 Aug 2009, 2102 hrs IST, IANS
Constables 1893 British map showing Pakistan, Afghanistan, Burma, Ceylon, Nepal, Bhutan, Sikkim as part of "Indian Empire". Lord Curzon and Britain's On to the Oxus policy was short lived. Churchill said it best "India is as ephimeral as the equator"
If Mr. Jaswant Singh and Bharat want to understand “Paksitan”, the need to understand the writings of Rai, Haldiram, Sarvarkar, and Gowalkar. They need to comprehend the wrongs done to the Dalits and the mistreatment of the Indian Muslims in present day Bhrat. Eulogizing Jinnah won’t help them comprehend Pakistan–reading the Saachaar report and taking corrective action will help them understand Pakistan. Writing a book on Jinnah as a great man may be a first step in comprehending the Muslim psyche, but if Bharat wants to find solutions, it has to dump the farce of a fake article of accession in Kashmir. If Bharat wants peace, then it has to overcome the paranoia about Pakistan. The current government in Dehithinks that peace with Pakistan is a reard for good behaviour. It needs to comprehend the fact that peace is the interest of all parties, and Bhratcan never be a regional power ’till it makes peace with Nepal, Bhutan, Sikkim, Lanka, Bangladesh, Mayanmar, Pakistan and China.
Kashmir and the subcontinent has a rich and tumultuous history. We can pick up the pieces in the nineteenth century, but the actual history of Kashmir begins much much much earlier, before Islam or Hinduism was present on the soil of our lands.
Slogans raised by Kashmiris all over Sirinagar & Indian Occupied Kashmir
Long before the Crescent and Star flew atop Islamabad, long before Mohammed Bin Qasim invaded Sind, long before the Mughals spread prosperity in all the nooks and corners of the subcontinent, long before the Sikh dynasty got Kashmir from the British, long before the Chundra Gupta Vikramadatya ruled India, the people of Kashmir were tied to the people of Pakistan.
Kashmir has been in existence since 5000 years. Its history can be traced to time immemorial. Kashmir has always been a magnet to immigrants.
Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | новости рупии | 卢比新闻 | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ルピーニュース | Notizie di Rupia | PAKISTAN LEDGER | پاکستاني کھاتا | DefensebriefsIntellibriefs Translate this page on to one of these languages: Subscribe to our RSS feed: | RUPEE NEWS | November 30th, 2007 | Moin Ansari | معین آنصآرّی | اخبار روپیہ | Save/Share
This is what Edward Desmond has to say about Kashmir in his book Himalyan Ulster:
On a map of the western Himalayas, the valley of Kashmir shows up as a smooth, oval-shaped patch amid a sea of surrounding peaks in what is today Indias Jammu and Kashmir state.
For thousands of years, travellers, freebooters, and empire builders have set down their breathless impressions of this valley the French writer Francois Bernier called it the paradise of the Indies with its towering pine forests, deep lakes, flower carpeted meadows, and fields of iridescent saffron. The seventeenth century Mughal emperor Jehangir sighed on his death-bed that his last wish was to visit Kashmir. Indians today revere the valley as the place they long to visit, and it serves as the setting for countless romantic Indian films.
Prior to Hinduism in the subcontinent, the Kashmir Valley (called Abhasrsa) traded with the Indus Valley Civilisation. In pre-Vedic times the people who lived in the Indus Valley lived in absolute harmony. There is some confusion as to who were the original inhabitants of the subcontinent. Many feel that there was a civilisation BEFORE the Dravidians landed in South Asia. Some have ventured to claim that based on the fact that all of Indias neighbours are Oriental, perhaps the original inhabitants of ancient India were Oriental in ethnic origin. The Dravidians either defeated the original peoples of India or totally assimilated with them. The Dravidians came to the subcontinent and made it their home. This is known: The Dravidians were not Hindu, the Dravidians preceded the Hindu era in the Subcontinent. The peaceful Dravidians were an enlightened and cultured peoples and they formed the Indus Valley Civilisation.
New Kashmiri slogans reported by Indian activist Arundhati Roy
The Aryans came to the subcontinent in many waves, and caused havoc with the local inhabitants. These barbaric hordes came to the subcontinent and totally destroyed the earlier civilisations and formed their own caste systems. After many waves of Aryans had invaded the subcontinent, Hinduism as a later wave to the land now called Pakistan. Hundreds of years were spent in wars between the Dravidians and the Aryans. These wars are noted in pre-vedic literature as Ramayana. After the Aryan Hindus had settled in the land, they started fighting amongst themselves. The Inter-Aryan wars were called the Mahabharta wars. Hindus claim that 650 million soldiers died in the Mahabaharta wars (I didn’t make up the numbers, I just reported them !).
The Arayans arrived in South Asia in waves. The Huns, the Rajputs and others were always in conflict. After the Hindu conflicts died down, around the 8th century B.C Buddhism took root in the subcontinent. Buddhist-Hindu wars claimed many lives.
The Kashmir valley was mostly inhabited by many people that included sun worshippers, Zorastarians, and Buddhists. Kashmir became an important centre of Brahman learning. Brahaman art, literature and philosophy flourished unhindered, on the backs of the untouchables, and the lower caste Hindus. After the 8th century the clear and loud message of Islam was heard in the Valley. It was the Sufis who carried the message of Mohamamd to Kashmir. The caste system of the Hindus, the Brahman cruelty, and the practices of Sati, and human sacrifices were fertile grounds for Islam in Kashmir. Slowly but surely, people converted to the message that accorded the Untouchables INSTANT equality among the Muslim brotherhood.
From 1326 to 1819, Muslims improved the lot of the Kashmiris and ruled the Kashmir valley with compassion and honour. The Mughals not only ruled Kashmir, they also brought it art, culture, music, paintings, and architecture that the people had never seen. Wherever the Moghuls lived they brought life with them. The Shalimar Gardens and the Mosques built in the Valley are a testament to the affluence of India in the 16th century. Jahangir was the wealthiest man on the planet and he spent his money to create luxury for his people. Kashmir benefited too. Hindu temples built in the sixteenth century were subsidised, and today they remain in the valley.
Hindus thrived in the Valley. The forefathers of the Nehrus lived and prospered in Kashmir during the Muslim rule. During the regimes of chaos during the Afghan rule (1752-1819) many Muslims lost their lives due to Patel persecution.
Kashmir was sold to the Sikhs following the defeat of Sikhs at the hands of the British in 1846, Gulab Singh, the cruel and dim-witted Dogra ruler of Jammu, acquired Kashmir from the British and ruthlessly tired to rule the state of Jammu & Kashmir.
The period of the Dogra rulers was the darkest in the history of the state. Gulab Singh was a ruthless ruler. He ruled by edict only, the edict of the Kirpan. Thus Jammu & Kashmir became a Princely State and remained so till 1947 until India occupied it.
ABHISARA
Contrary to popular belief, Kashmir is not a monolith. It has been called many names throughout history. The recorded history of Kashmir is more than five thousand years. On the eve of Alexander’s invasion, Kashmir was called Abhisara. The great Kashmiri historians, Kalhan and Ratnakar have written beautiful stories about the valley, but the story of Kashmir begins much before that and Rajatarangini of Kalhana records some of it. Ibn-e-Batuta, Al-Beruni and Fa-hien mention Kashmir in their travelogues. Many Mughals, including Akbar mentions Kashmir in their many diaries. Muslim Kashmiri poets have eulogised the beauty of the Valley of Kashmir for centuries. Lalitaditya Avantivarman, Sikander Butshikan, Shamas-u-din Iraqi, Mirza Hyder Dughlat, Faquirullah Kanta, Mir Hazar Khan Zainul-Abedin, Duralabhavardhana, Jiyapida are only a few of the famous kings of the Valley.
Some Indian revisionists have tried to portray the picture that Kashmiri history begins with Maharaja Ghulab Singh. Kashmiri history began a long time before partition, a very long time before Ghulab Singh. It surely began before the very brief Sikha-Shahi of Lahore. To start the history of Kashmir in the nineteenth century is like beginning the history of the subcontinent after the war of independence of 1857 (The Great Indian Mutiny).
Kashmir and the subcontinent has a rich and tumultuous history. We can pick up the pieces in the nineteenth century, but the actual history of Kashmir begins much much much earlier, before Islam or Hinduism was present on the soil of our lands.
Long before the Crescent and Star flew atop Islamabad, long before Mohammed Bin Qasim invaded Sind, long before the Mughals spread prosperity in all the nooks and corners of the subcontinent, long before the Sikh dynasty briefly controlled Kashmir, and long before the Chundra Gupta Vikramadatya ruled India, the people of Kashmir were tied to the people of Pakistan.
The history of the subcontinent pre-dates Hinduism. Some in secular India are pawning off religion as history. Vedic events are religion. Ramayana and Mahabharta are the holy scriptures of Hinduism. These scriptures need to be revered and respected. We learn a lot about our land from these scriptures.
The state of Kashmir was not created by the Sikhs. Various areas of Kashmir were re-incarnated by the Sikhs during the British rule. The British defeated the Sikh leader, and the rule reverted to Hindu (Dogra) maharaja.
Ancient Origins
Some recent historians have portrayed the history of the subcontinent as wars between two monoliths, the Hindus and the Muslims. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The history of the subcontinent is a history of wars between the various peoples who lived the subcontinent and the people who came to the subcontinent. The history of the subcontinent is replete with wars against the foreigners.
Some recent revisionists have portrayed the history of Hinduism as the history of India. The absolute fact is that The Indus Valley Civilisation preceded the Aryans, and preceded Hinduism. IF Islam is a foreign influence in the subcontinent so is Hinduism. The Aryan Swastika was imported from the caucus mountains, and has non-Indian origins. The only original people of the subcontinent were the people who were in the Indus Valley Civilisation.
Stone Age
Though man existed in Palaeolithic, and Stone ages, the first real civilisation in the subcontinent was the Indus Valley Civilisation. The Pakistanis of Sindh, Punjab, Kashmir the Baraouhis tribes of Balauchistan are the true descendants of the Indus Valley Civilisation . The Aryans were invaders who came and destroyed the Indus Valley Civilisation. The Aryans then began creating states in the rest of India. The story of Ramayana is basically a story of wars between the Aryans and the Dravidians. The story of Mahabharta is a story of inter-Aryan wars.
Around 468 B.C. Jainism and Buddhism appeared on the scene. Both competed with the tenants of Hindusim. Gautam Buddha was such a dynamic sage, that many Hindus have adopted him as a God. Even some Muslims consider him a prophet. However the fact remains that Buddhism is different from Hinduism.
Though many Hindus later regard Buddha as God, the Brahmans were always leery of Buddhists because this reduced their power. Buddhism is fundamentally different than Hinduism because it does not believe in the caste system. Because of the lack of the caste system, the Brahmans did not like Buddhists.
Alexander Invades
On the eve of Alexander’s invasion, Kashmir was called Abhisara. Abhisara consisted of the districts of Punch and Naushara. One of the few direct results of the Greek invasions of India was the establishment of Greek colonies in the area of Kashmir. One of Asokas edicts refers to the existence of Yavana (Greek) settlers on the fringes of his empire. We now know that he was referring to the area of Hunza. Actually after the fall of the Muyeria (Greek) kingdoms in India, the Bacterians formed a number of Greek kingdoms in the area in and around Kashmir. In fact Chandragupta actually faced Alexander for military help (324-300 BC) but did not secure it.
The foundation of the Maurya empire in the subcontinent saw Kashmir exist on the outer fringes of the empire. Chandragupta Muyara was a Jain. According to the records of Hieun Tsang and Kalhanas Rajaatarangini, Kashmir was included in the empire of Asoka the great (273-232 BC). One of the most brutal massacres of Hindus occurred at the hands of the Muyara kings. Some historians put the number at 300,000 (akin to 3 million in present day numbers).
Contrary to BJP belief, all massacres in India were not committed by Muslims, Persians and Arabs. Asoka renounced violence, and renounced his religion after the Kalinga war, and he became a Buddhist. The Brahmans did not like him, and many historians think the Brahaman opposition to Asoka led to the destruction of the Muyarian dynasty.
With political disunity in the subcontinent, many foreigners invaded India. Alexander’s kingdom was divided. The Bacterians invaded India (250 BC). From the ashes of the Muyara empire, Kanishka the conqueror rose to power (78 AD) and began a new era in India. He annexed the Indus Valley and conquered Kashmir. He set up his headquarters in Purushapura (Peshawar). Kanishka was a Zorastrian. His coins display the sun god. Later in life he supported Buddhism (to the ire of the Hindu Brahmans). Kanishka had convened the Buddhist Council of Kashmir to spread Buddhism instead of Hinduism in the subcontinent (much to the chagrin of the Brahmans ). During Asoka, Buddhism had become the state religion. Hinduism survived only due to Indian princes like Gautamiputra Satkarni.
With the fall of the Muyara dynasty, the Guptas came to power (beginning of the fourth century AD) with their independent kingdoms. Dr. R.C. Majumdar writes that The empire of Samudragupta included the whole of Northern India EXCEPT Kashmir. During this time Fa-hien visited India to study Buddhism (399 AD). The Gupta period saw the distinct revival of Hinduism in the subcontinent. Buddhism declined, and never did rise in India. Kashmir was either independent at the time or was an insignificant state.
When did Kashmiri History begin
Although some Indians would like it to make it so, the history of Kashmir does not begin with Maharaja Ghulab Singh. Kashmiri history began a long time before partition, a very long time before Ghulab Singh. It surely began before the very brief Sikha-Shahi of Lahore. To start the history of Kashmir in the nineteenth century is like beginning the history of the subcontinent after the war of independence of 1857 (The Great Indian Mutiny).
The recorded history of Kashmir is more than five thousand years. The Sikh Dogras have said wonderful things about the paradise called Kashmir, but the story of Kashmir pre-dates Sikhism. The great Kashmiri historians, Kalhan and Ratnakar have written beautiful stories about the valley, but the beautiful story of Kashmir pre-dates Hindusim. Muslim Kashmiri poets have eulogised the beauty of the Valley of Kashmir for centuries, but the story of the valley pre-dates Islam. Lalitaditya Avantivarman, Sikander Butshikan, Shamas-u-din Iraqi, Mirza Hyder Dughlat, Faquirullah Kanta, and Mir Hazar Khan are only few of the famous kings of the Valley.
The history of the subcontinent pre-dates Hinduism. Some in secular India are pawning off religion as history. Vedic events are religion. Ramayana and Mahabharta are the holy scriptures of Hinduism. These scriptures need to be revered and respected. If these holy scriptures are mistaken for history, than we are all in trouble.
The IVC
Five thousand years ago the people of the Indus Valley Civilisation lived in harmony on the banks of the Indus. Moenjadaro, Harappa and Taxila were all towns on the banks of the Indus. This was one of the original civilisation on the planet. This civilisation is marked as great a civilisation as the Chinese and the Egyptian civilisation. The Indus Valley Civilisation did not extend East of the Indus. Neither did it extend beyond the Western Mountain ranges of Bolan, and Khyber. The Indus Valley Civilisation existed on the banks of the Indus. The Indus valley Civilisation existed in what is today Pakistan. Pakistan is the natural inheritor of the Indus Valley Civilisation, just like modern day China is the natural inheritor of the Chinese civilisation, and modern day Egypt in the natural inheritor of the Egyptian civilisation. Pakistan existed 5000 years ago, even though it was not called Pakistan. This is the geographic two nation theory.
People up the river traded with people down the river. People up in the mountains traded with people down in the plains. For thousands of years, Kashmiris cut down trees and threw them into the river. This was trade at its best. The people of the Indus valley traded with Mesopotamia to the West, but there was no civilisation to the east of the Indus to trade with. There were only monkeys and apes. A human civilisation did exist in the Malaya straits but that was too far for the Indus Valley Pakistanis.
Recent archaeological finds in Kashmir have supported the theory that the Indus valley Civilisation indeed stretched right to the origins of the Indus beyond the Himalayas, into the Karakorums and into Kashmir.
All through the centuries Pakistan and Kashmir were trading partners to the WEST and NORTH-WEST of current Pakistan by land routes and traders with Oman and Gulf state through Arabian sea. In modern times Sindh was part of Bombay presidency and there was hardly any trade across Rajistan desert. Under Mughals, Mirs of Sindh maintained quite an independent administration on current day Sindh Province. The Middle East had always used these Baluchistan, Sarhad, and Kashmir and other areas in current Pakistan to access the main land in India. In fact Gwader is a Pakistani Island port that was owned by Kuwait till the sixties.
Sarhad historically was trading partners with Kashmir, Punjab, Afghanistan and central Asia (including Sinkiang province of present day china). Kashmir did not even have a road link to India except through Muslim dominated portion of Punjab —through a town called Gurdaspur. (The tragedy of Gurdaspuspur is the tragedy of Kashmir. Today The Muslim town of Gurdaspur is part of India, and so is Kashmir). All its trade of fruits, wood and handicrafts was to its south west and west (Punjab and Sarhad) the wood from its forests flowed down the INDUS to Pakistan and all the administrative services such as electricity/postal/communication etc. were linked from present Pakistan. Punjab was the only province which had major trade eastward. But the trade was also with countries to the west as well as rest of Pakistan. All of North west India east of the Khyber pass, is clearly a totally unique country, naturally allied to Kashmir.
THE ARYAN HUNS INVADE THE IVC
With the decline of the Guptas, the nomadic tribes of Central Asia called the Huns invaded India. Their leader Tormana invaded Kashmir (500 AD).
Jawaharlal Nehru in his book Glimpses of World History says Skandagupta, the fifth of the Gupta line had to face this Hun invasion…gradually they spread all over Gandhara and the greater part of Northern India. THEY TORTURED THE BUDDHISTS AND COMMITTED ALL MANNER OF FRIGHTFULNESS….There must have been continuous warfare against them, but the Guptas could not drive them away. Fresh waves of Huns came …
The valley roars with these slogans
HINDU SAVAGERY
Jawaharlal Nehru says the following about the Hindu Huns …Torman installed himself king . He was bad enough, but after him came his son Miharagula, who was an unmitigated savage and fiendishly cruel. Kalhana in his history of Kashmir–the Rajatrangini–tells us that one of his Miharagulas amusements was to have elephants thrown over the great precipices into the valley below.
The treatment of men was sometimes worse then that of animals (some of the animals like cows were actually revered because they were Gods). Lower caste Hindus had a miserable life. Other historians have commented that the treatment of women was even worse, specially women of lower castes, they were considered the property of the upper caste Hindus, to be molested and/or raped at will. In many cases the new bride had to stay a night with the village Brahman before she was married off. Kashmir converted to Islam during this time period. It was cruelty like this that led to the whole sale conversion to Islam. The new religion offered them equality and saved them from the Brahmans.
Nehru continues, Soon however the Hun power weakened in India… the Huns have been defeated and driven back, but many remain in odd corners. The Great Gupta dynasty fades away after Balditya.
The next great event for Kashmir was the birth of Harshavardhana (606-647 AD). There are references to Harshas expeditions to Kashmir. According to the Chinese traveller Hiuen Tsang Kashmir was an independent state at the time. Harshas ancestors were sun worshippers, however he himself was attracted towards the Mahayana form of Buddhism. The Brahmans were very displeased with him and even conspired to kill him. Harsha spent time and money on arts and literature, and drama, and was probably the last great Buddhist emperor of India.
THE RAJPUT HINDU ERA IN INDIA
The death of Harsha ushered in an era of anarchy again. The Rajputs were the invaders this time. This era is called the Rajput era. According to Tod The Rajputs were the descendants of Sakas,Huns, Ushans, Gujaaras etc.
According to Rajatarangini of Kalhana which forms the chief source of our history on Kashmir, Duralabhavardhana founded a new royal dynasty in Kashmir about the middle of the 7th century. Lalitaditya ascended the throne in 724 AD and he conquered large areas of India and brought it under Kashmiri rule. After him (750 AD) the power of Kashmir receded.
Jiyapida, the grandson of Lalitaditya tried to revive the reputation of the Karkota dynasty. The Karkota dynasty in Kashmir was replaced by the Utpala dynasty about the middle of the 9th century. The Rajputs were true Hindus and patronised Hindu religion and culture in all of India.
THE RAJPUT ERA ENDS The end of the Rajput era created the beginning of the Muslim era in India. Dr. Smith says that this became so prominent that the centuries from the death of Harsha to the Mohammedan conquest of Hindustan, extending in round numbers from the middle of the seventh century to the close of the twelfth century, was the Rajput era . This is 500 years of Hindu rule. This is one of the few periods of history when Hindus ruled India.
On the eve of the Arab invasion of Sind (712 A.D: Quaid-e-Azam said that this is the day the Pakistan movement began in India), Chandrapida, the grandson of Durlabhavardhan was the ruler of the Korkot (Kashmir ) kingdom The most powerful king was Muktipida Lalitadya, brother and successor of Chandrapida. He was a great conqueror, and is said to have conquered Punjab, Dardistan and Kabul .
Mahmud of Gahazni made two attempts between 1015-1021 to conquer Kashmir, but was unsuccessful. Mahmud of Ghazni attacked temples in the subcontinent because the temples were the seats of political power. The Brahaman priests kept all knowledge to themselves. They kept all knowledge away from the population, locked up in temples (including the knowledge to build the temple). To destroy the political and military power of the city, the temple had to be destroyed. Since the high priest controlled the populations, they had to be defeated. The temples also contained all knowledge of the area. Mohammed Ghauri was the founder of the Muslim empire in India (1173 A.D). The slave dynasty lasted from 1206-1290. The Khilji dynasty lasted from 1290-1320. The Tughlaq dynasty lasted from (1320-1412). In 1304 Ibin-e-Batuta visited visited China through Kashmir. The Syed and Lodhi dynasty lasted from 1413-1526. During the reign of the sultans of Delhi the Khokars had established themselves between Lahore and Ghazni on the Southern border of Kashmir.
The caste system, the practice of Sati, human sacrifices, the ostracization of the lowest caste Hindus from society, and the treatment meeted out to them led to the infusion of Islam into the beautiful valley of the safron. Since Islam allowed instant equality to the down-trodden the religion made huge in-roads into the valley.
From the eighth century through Muslims permeated the state of Kashmir even though the rulers were Buddhist. Kashmiri rulers were Buddhist till it was conquered by the Muslims in 1339 AD. Even though Kashmir was inhabited by Muslims, it was still being ruled by Buddhist princes till 1349 when Shah Mirza, after the death of his royal patron, ascended the throne under the title of Samsuddin Shah. Thus began the Muslim era in Kashmir. K.Ali writes that of the rulers of Kashmir, Zainul-Abedin was the best and most liberal ruler under whom people enjoyed a peaceful and prosperous reign. After Abedin, anarchy reigned in Kashmir. At the end of 1540, Haider Mirza a relative of the Mughal emperor Humanyun occupied the state. But the Mirza dynasty was overthrown by the Chakk dynasty in 1561.
From the eighth century till the fifteenth century the population of Kashmir changed. However it was not Arab invasions, or Persian conquest that transformed Kashmir, it was the power of the new religion. For seven hundred years Kashmir was under Buddhist rule. However the rule was autocratic, and people were treated like animals. The general populace was disenchanted with the state machinery, and the state religion. IN droves they converted to Islam. By the middle of the sixteenth century, the accession of a Muslim to the throne was a forgone conclusion.
At the time of Baburs invasion 1526 Kashmir and Sind were independent but they did not play any major role. Around the 3rd part of the sixteenth century Kashmir was passing through disorder. The chaotic condition of the state induced Akbar to interfere in its internal affairs. Moreover the excellent climate of the valley and its natural scenery might have attracted Akbar. Akbar conquered and annexed Kashmir in 1586-1587. Henceforth Kashmir became the summer seat of the Mughal government. During Jahangir, and Shahjahan’s reign the Mughals built the magnificent Shalimar Garden in Kashmir. This is long before Ghulab Singh was in Kashmir.
For the next 100 years peace remained in Kashmir. Saddozais (Sikander Butshikan, Shamas-u-din Iraqi, Mirza Hyder Dughlat, Faquirullah Kanta, Mir Hazar Khan ) ruled Kashmir for almost a century before the Sikhs. Peace was broken by the rise of Sikh power. The Sikhs rose to power in 1675 under Guru Gobind Singh. After the death of Gobinda Singh in 1708 the Sikhs established several states in the Punjab. Rajat Singh establish the Sikh empire in the Punjab. The Sikh rule in the history of the subcontinent is a footnote in history. It was extremely brief and was known for its stupidities (hence the word Sikha-shahi, and the jokes about Sikhs). Gulab Singh tried to rule Kashmir by putting together diverse and far-flung areas like Jammu bordering on the Punjab, Ladakh bordering on Tibet and Gilgit bordering on Sinkiang, Afghanistan and Central Asia across the Pamirs. There are many diverse groups in Kashmir. Gulab Sings was a ruthless ruler.
MAHRAJAH HARI SINGH: SEX and FOLLIES OF THE NINCOMPOOP RAJA OF Kashmir
This is what Larry Collins and Dominique Lapiere write about the Sikhs in the Punjab in their book (Freedom at Midnight… the source book for the screen-play Gandhi).The collapse of the Mogul empire gave the Sikhs the chance to carve out a kingdom of their own in their beloved Punjab. The tragedy of the Punjab was that while Moslems, and Sikhs could live under the British, neither could live under each other. The Moslems memory of Sikh rule in the Punjab was one of mosques defiled, women outraged, tombs razed, Moslems without regard to age or sex butchered, bayoneted, strangled, shot down, hacked to pieces, burnt alive. This was the legacy of Gulab Singh and his successors.
This following is what Larry Collins and Dominique Lapiere write about last maharaja of Kashmir Hari Singh in their account of the partition of India (Freedom at Midnight… the source book for the screen-play Gandhi).
Hari Singh was a weak vacillating indecisive man who divided his time between opulent feasts in his winter capital in Jammu and the beautiful flower-choked lagoons of his summer capital, Sirinagar, the Venice of the Orient. He had begun his reign with a few timid aims for reform which were quickly abandoned for an authoritarian system that kept his jails filled with his political foes. Their most recent occupant had been none other than Jawarlal Nehru. The prince had ordered Nehru arrested when he tried to visit the state in which he was born. Hari Singh too had an army to defend the frontiers of his state and give his claims to independence a menacing emphasis.
Kashmir kee Mandi Rawalpindi
The bonfire (of the accounts of sexual eccentricities of some of India princes were in themselves lengthy enough to stoke a good fire for hours …. were being burnt at the behest of the British government ) consuming the archives dealing with the maharaja of Kashmir destroyed the traces of one of the more unsavoury scandals of the world between wars. The impetuous prince was trapped in fragrant delicto in Londons Savoy hotel by a man he assumed to be the husband of his ravishing bed companion. In fact, the prince had fallen into a gang of blackmailers who proceeded to drain the state of Kashmir, via the princes personal bank account, OF A VERY CONSIDERABLE PART OF ITS REVENUES. The case finally broke when the young lady’s real husband persuaded that he had not been properly remunerated for the loan of his wife, went to the police. In the court case that followed, the unfortunate Maharajas infidelity was concealed under the pseudonym of Mr. A. Disillusioned for good with women as a result of his tribulations, Hari Singh returned to Kashmir, where he discovered new sexual horizons in the company of young men of his state. The accounts of his activities had been faithfully reported to the representatives of the Crown, Now whipped by the fresh mountain breeze of Srinagar, they disappeared into the Himalayan sky.
He ( Hari Singh) was a weak vacillating man whose perversions and orgies had given him the reputation of the Himalayan Brogia. Unfortunately, Hari Singh, the man who was Mr. A had titillated the readers of the British penny press before the war, was something else. He was the hereditary Hindu maharaja of the most strategically situated princely state in India.
Logic seemed to dictate that Kashmir join with Pakistan. Its people were Moslem. It had been one of the areas originally selected for an Islamic state by Rehmat Ali when he formulated his impossible dream. The k in Pakistan was for Kashmir.
Hari Singh the last playboy Raja of Kashmir was an abdominal character-less hedonist bi-sexual. His only redeeming quality was that he held out against Patels bullying. Hari Singh was escorted out of the state under the curfew of the Indian army. India claims that next day he signed the so called article of accession to India. According to Alistair Lamb a noted historian of Kashmir, has cast several doubts on the article of accession. India’s claim to accession is in dispute. The U.N. recognised the dispute, and treats Kashmir as disputed territory between India and Pakistan.
UNDERSTANDING KASHMIR: A geographic region or an idea?
What is the background of Kashmir ? Pakistan is a country based on the banks on the Indus and its tributaries. All its major cities owe their existence to the rivers originating in the Himalayan mountains. Kashmir lies north of Pakistan, a natural extension to the mouth of the Indus river. It is in the ancient Silk Rout thorough which noted travellers like Ibn-Batuta, and Fa-hein travelled. Pakistan is the size of Texas and Minnesota put together. Kashmir is another Minnesota added to it.
Kashmir means many things to many peoples. The total area of J&K state is 2.22 lakh (222,000) sq. kms. Of this, the Pakistani area accounts for 78,114 sq. kms. Chinese area is 37,555 sq. kms plus another 3,180 sq. kms. ( that was an area adjusted during the boundary agreement with Pakistan ). At present, 35% of the state is Azad Kashmir and 17% is Chinese Kashmir. In a landmark boundary adjustment between Pakistan and China, China received 2.3% from Pakistan (There is no boundary dispute between China and Pakistan. China is today Pakistan’s largest arms supplier. India occupies less than half of the original state which belonged to Hari Singh in 1947). The Indian area is 1.01 lakh (101,000)sq. kms. The Indian area is divided into the following divisions: Ladakh, Jammu and the Kashmir Valley. The Ladakh division is 49,146 sq. kms. The Jammu division is 26,293 sq. kms. and the Muslim Kashmir Valley is 15,948 sq. kms.
The population of the state governed by India is 6 million; of this, 64% are Muslims, 32% are Hindus, 2.2% are Sikhs and 1.2% are Buddhists. Another 2 million Muslims live in Azad Kashmir; taken together, Muslims would constitute 75% of the population of the entire state of Jammu & Kashmir, which is roughly 5% of the total Muslim population of India (the number of Muslims in India is more than 100 million). The Indians claim that in 1947 half a million Hindus and Sikhs also lived in Azad Kashmir. When 5 million Muslims were transferred from East Punjab to Pakistan, half a million Muslims fled Kashmir.
The Indian part of the state of Kashmir is divided into 3 main regions: Jammu, Kashmir Valley and Ladakh. In terms of area, Ladakh forms 58%, Jammu 26% and Kashmir valley 16%. Buddhists used to constitute a majority in Ladakh but a few years ago (according to the last Indian census reports) Muslims are in a majority in Ladakh now. Hindus form a majority in Jammu and Muslims form a majority in Kashmir valley. In British India Kashmir was about 95% Muslim. Before 1947, nearly a million non-Muslims — mainly Kashmiri Hindus called Pundits ruled the Kashmiris with the Dogra ruler Hari Singh. After the Dogra raja left the state in Indian custody, the Pandits also began leaving Kashmir. Today they live in Jammu and are asking for a separate union territory called Panditdesh.
“We are Pakistanis and Pakistan is us because we are tied with the country through Islam,” he roared, as the crowd cheered him and chanted: “Hum Pakistani hain, Pakistan hamara hai” (We are Pakistanis, Pakistan is ours). Syed Gilani
Shair-e-Mashriq, Hakeem-e-Ummat Sir Dr. Alama Mohammed Iqbal
THREE PHASES OF A VISIONARY by Moin Ansari
(Note from author: I started this in 1997 and it remains “a work in progress”. I have included the unformatted discussion and feedback from our readers at the bottom of this article. As we move forward, all feedback will be included in the article.)
“Iqbal, that immortal poet of Islam, whose poetry served as a beaconlight in the darkest period of our history and whose message will ever help us on the way to our destiny” Choudhary Rahmat Ali (1947, ‘Pakistan’).
It was the best of times. Ras Tofari became the emperor of Ethiopia. The planet Pluto was discovered by C.W. Tombaugh. All’s quiet on the Western front was playing in the theaters.
It was the worst of times in the New World. In Germany, Nazis were gaining power. D.H. Lawrence the English novelist had died. The U.S. population was 122 million, and in the land of the Dollar the bottom had fallen out of the financial markets. Wall Street was is total disarray. The stock had crashed. Savings accounts had been wiped out. People had given up hope. Many Millionaires had lost their fortunes and flung themselves out of their windows to their death. Conspicuous consumption had taken its toll. America was in the midst of a depression. It was the year 1930.
And in the old world, in the Subcontinent a dreamer, was making a speech in the city of Allahbad. He was speaking at the session of the All India Muslim League.
“It cannot be denied that Islam regarded as an ethical ideal plus certain kind of polity by which expression I mean a social structure regulated by a legal system and animated by a specific ethical idea has been chief formative factor in the life history of the Muslims of India.”
Would you like me to see Islam as a moral and political ideal, meeting the same fate in the e world of Islam as Christianity has already met in Europe ” Is it possible to retain Islam as an ethical ideal and to reject it as polity in favor of national politics in which religious attitude is not permitted to play its part ?”
Iqbal was philosophizing about separating religion form politics. He maintained that one could not put Islam in a separate compartment, and deal with the political realities of the time. Iqbal maintained that Islam had to be part and parcel of everything a Muslim did. He refuted the secular claim that one could practice religion in the mosque and live in a United India. K. Ali a noted Pakistani historian states that “the construction of a polity on national lines, if it means the displacement of the Islamic principle of solidarity, is simply unthinkable to a Muslim.”
Iqbal, speaking as the President of the All Indian Muslim League was saying “Islam is in jeopardy“, and we must save it by creating a separate homeland for the Muslims of India. Perhaps he was saying that Islam is in jeopardy in India, and we must provide it a nurturing ground, in certain parts of India, where it can grow and prosper, and influence. Iqbal went on to announce his thoughts at the Allahbad session and I quote Iqbal
” India is a continent of human groups belonging to different races, speaking different languages and professing different religions …. To base a constitution on the conception of a homogeneous India …. is to prepare for a civil war.
The formation of a consolidated North West Indian State appears to be the final destiny of the Muslims, at least of North-West India”.
K. Ali writes, that “of a separate Muslim state in India appeared to a be a dream of a the poet Iqbal at that time, and it was bitterly criticized. Since 1930, the idea of a separate State was gaining ground in the hearts of the Muslims of India“
Iqbals’s idea was given the moniker of P-A-K-I-S-T-A-N by one Chaudry Rehmat Ali, an Indian Muslim student studying in England. Iqbal had been propagating the idea for a separate homeland for the Muslims. He had been writing to Jinnah, asking him to be the lawyer to defend the cause of the Muslims of India. Quaid-e-Azam, Mohammed Ali Jinnah took the challenge, and the rest as they say is history.
It is clear that earlier statements by Iqbal when the creation of Pakistan was still in the embryonic stage cannot be taken as his true endorsement of a united India. In the thirties almost the entire Muslim population was not entertaining the idea of separatism, and even the Quaid-e-Azam Mohammed Ali Jinnah and others were working for the unity of India.
Quaid-e-Azam, Mohammed Ali Jinnah said that:
” the differences in India, between the two major nations, the Hindus and the Muslims are a thousand times greater when compared with the continent of Europe.
India is not a national state, India is not a country, but a sub-continent composed of nationalities, the two nations being Hindus and Muslims whose culture and civilization, language and literature, art and architecture, name and nomenclature, sense of value and proportion, laws and jurisprudence, social and moral codes, customs and calendar, history and traditions, aptitudes and ambitions, outlook on life and of life are fundamentally different nay in many respects antagonistic”.
Any discussion of Iqbal becomes a discussion of Pakistan. That is a tribute to the poet dreamer. The discussion of Pakistan is incomplete without bringing up Iqbal, and the biography of Pakistanis is never complete without discussing the philosophy of ” The poet of the East “. FAIZ AHMAD FAIZ: Salute to a great Punjabi a fantastic Urdu poet and a giant Pakistani
The two nation theory was initially enunciated by Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, dreamt by Iqbal, and preached by Mohammed Ali Jinnah. It was this enunciation of the two nation theory that appealed to the hearts and minds of Mussalmans all over the subcontinent. They in one voice voted for the Muslim League and Jinnah. Muslims from the Southern tip of Tamiland, to the Central India, to Eastern India accepted and fought for the Two nation Theory. It is incredible that the Pakistan movement began in the United Provinces of India (U.P, a conglomeration of independent princely states, that were railroaded into a province by the British) , and was led by Muslims of Northern India from Aligarh, Lucknow, and Delhi, Muslims who never had any hope of becoming part of Pakistan. Muslims all over the subcontinent voted, worked and died for the ideals dreamt by Iqbal, and preached by Jinnah.
Who was Iqbal? One of the first to advocate a separate homeland in India, Iqbal
(1876-1938) was the second crucial link in our independence struggle, the factor that took Sir Syed’s (1817-1898) ideals and passed the torch to Quaid-e-Azam Mohammed Ali Jinnah (1876-1948)
The Freedom Struggle Torch carried through generations:
Goals: To awaken the Muslims of India so that they could regain their lost glory and greatness. To wake up the Muslims and be more practical. To show the Muslim youth of India the path of truth and progress
Biography
Name: Mohammed Iqbal
Other names (Alaises) : Poet of the East, The Poet Thinker, The Poet who dreamt Pakistan, The poet who awakened the Muslims of India. Spiritual father of Pakistan.
Born: November, 1876 in Sialkot
Profession: Taught Philosophy and Law. Barrister at Law. Member Punjab Legislative Council 1926-1930. President of Muslim League 1930. Knighted by the British in 1992 for poetry
Hobbies and Passion, and claim to fame: Poetry in Urdu and Persian
Greatest influence:Surah e Nafas: Nietzsche and other German nation constructors
Publications:
Asrar-e-Khudi translated as the Secrets of Self, 1920, 1940
Piyam -e Mashriq. Message of the East 1930
The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam 1930
Education: M.A. Government College Lahore, Barrister at law England ,Doctorate in Philosophy Germany 1905-1908
Experience: Khilafat Movement: Alama Iqbal took part in the brief but important struggle that was carried out by the Muslims of the subcontinent for the restoration of the Khilifat headquartered in Turkey. In WW1 Turkey had allied itself with Germany against Britain. When Germany and Turkey were defeated in 1918 the British had abolished the Muslim caliphate at the Treaty of Versailles in 1920. The Muslims of the subcontinent (led by Mohammed Ali and Shaukat Ali, and Abul Kalam Azad ) were outraged, and led a nationwide campaign of agitation to protest the abolition of the Ottoman Empire Caliphate. To this day young Turks remember this movement, and think of Pakistanis as the natural successors of that movement.
All India Muslim league: He expressed great satisfaction at the formation of the Muslim League in 1906.
MPA Lahore: In 1926 Iqbal contested the election from Lahore, and won by a large majority
Nehru Report: In 1928 when the Nehru report came out, Iqbal was disappointed by the he Hindu attitude. At this juncture he made up his mind to form a separate homeland for the Muslims of India
Vision for Pakistan: In 1930 as President of the All India Muslim League, he enunciated the Two nation Theory. ” The Muslims wish to lead a life of freedom and honor. They want to live as a nation and this can be achieved if they have a separate Islamic state”.
AIML session 1936
Struggle for Pakistan: To his last day, Alama Iqbal was a sincere friend of Quaid-e-Azam, assisting him in putting together a coalition of Muslims together. Iqbal was coaxing the slumbering masses to wake up and demand a homeland. Iqbal was criticized by the orthodox religious right for his “shikwah” and “jawab-shiwah”.
1) HUM BULBULAIN HAIN IS CHAMAN KI , YEH WATAN HAI HUMARA. HINDUSTAN HUMARA
“Saare Jahan se Aachha/ Hindusthan Hamara“
The first phase of Iqbal was as an Indian nationalist. He believed that both the Hindus and the Muslims could live together to return the subcontinent of India to its pre-British Moghul glory. This belief was made under the hypothesis that the two-century British period was an aberration in the thousand year history of South Asia. Iqbal believed that after the British left, South Asians (‘Indians’) could live together in peace and harmony and make the country great again. In the Forties, the Muslims made up about 40% of the population of South Asia (‘India’) and Hindus were in slight majority. However the cultural and social centers of South Asia were in the hands of the Muslims. During this phase of his life Iqbal believed that South Asia is as big as Western Europe could compete as a great nation against Europe, America and China. Jinnah at the time also experimented with unity and was called “The ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity “.
Here is Iqbal clearly disassociating himself from the scheme of Pakistan though he still defends his Allahbad speech made four years earlier
Dr. Sir Mohd. Iqbal Kt. M. A., Ph.D. Barrister-at-Law, Lahore
4th March 1934 My dear Mr. Thompson
I have just received your review of my book. It is excellent and I am grateful to you for the very kind things you have said of me. But youhave made one mistake which I hasten to point out as I consider itrather serious. You call me [a] protagonist of the scheme called‘ Pakistan’. Now Pakistan is not my scheme. The one that I suggestedin my address is the creation of a Muslims Province–i.e. a province having an overwhelming population of Muslims–in the North west of India. This province will be, according to my scheme,a part of the proposed Indian Federation.
Pakistan scheme proposes a separate federation of Muslim Provinces directly related to England as a separate dominion. This scheme originated in Cambridge. The authors of this scheme believe that we Muslim Round Tablers have sacrificed the Muslim nation on the altar of Hindu orso called Indian Nationalism
Yours sincerely,
Mohammad Iqbal
SECOND PHASE OF IQBAL: PAN ISLAMISM
2) CHEEN – O ARAB HUMARA, HINDUSTAAN HUMARA, MUSLIM HAIN HUM, WATAN HAI SARA JAHAN HUMARA
Disappointed by the Hindu attitudes, Iqbal began to think himself as a Muslim first, and an ‘Indian’ second. During this stage of his thinking, Alama Iqbal began believing in Pan-Islamism. Iqbal worked with Mohammed Ali and Shaukat Ali and Abul Kalaam Azad. He actively wrote poems on his belief that all Muslims should think of themselves as Muslims first. Caste and Creed were to be given up, and nationalism was shunned for the crescent and star.
Cheen-o-Arab hamara, Hindustan hamara
Muslim main hum, watan hai sara jahan hamara
Tauheed ki amanat senon main hai hamarey
Asan nahin mitana naam-o-nishaan hamara
Duniya kay bu’t kadon main, wo pehla ghar Khuda ka
Hum uss kay pasban hain, wo pasban hamara
Baatil say dabney waley, aey Asman! nahin hum
Sou baar ker chuka hai Tu imtihan hamara
Salar-e-Karwan hai Meer-e-Hijaaz (PBUH) apna
Iss naam say hai baaqi, aaram-e-jahan hamara
Iqbal ka tarana baang-e-dara hai goya
Hota hai jada paima, phir karwan hamara
(Meanings: Cheen-o-Arab = China and Arabia; Hindustan = India; watan = homeland; jahan = world; Tauheed ki amanat = Islam; Senon = Insight; asan = easy; mitana = eliminate; naam-o-nishan = survival; bu’t kadon = idol temples; pehla ghar Khuda ka = Referring to Khana Kaaba; pasban = Protector; Baatil = Oppression; Dabney waley = Oppressed; Asman = Nature; Salar-e-Karwan = Leader of Caravan; Meer-e-Hijaaz (PBUH) = Muhammad (PBUH); Aaram-e-jahan = satisfaction; Tarana = Anthem; bang-e-dara = Voice of bell; jada paima = reactivate)
THE CONCEPT OF KHUDI (self)
Iqbal wrote on the concept of self.
” Khoodi ko kur bulund itna kai khuda bundai say khood poochay, buta teri ruzaa kiya hai “.
This concept of self asked the Muslims to improve their lot by themselves, and not be at the mercy of any other person or nationality.
THIRD PHASE OF IQBAL:PAKISTANI SEPARATISM
3) KHANJAR HILAL KA HAI QAUMI NITAAN HAMARAH
باطل سے دبنے والے اسماں نھیں سو بار کت چکا ھي امتھاں ھمارا
توشاھیں ھے بسيرا کر پھاڑوں کي چٹانوںپر
پلٹنا چھپٹنا چھپٹ کے پلٹنا
لھو گرمانے کا ھے بھانا
“Tu shaaheen hai, basaira kar pharaon kee chatanon pur”..
“Jhapatna palatna, palat kar jhapatna;
Lahu garm rakhne ka hai ik bahana”…..Alama Iqbal
This is the third and final stage of Iqbal’s’ thinking patterns. Influenced by Sir Syed Ahmad Khan writings, Iqbal changed his thinking. During this phase of his life, Iqbal worked for the All India Muslim League, whose sole purpose was the creation of a separate homeland for the Muslims of the Subcontinent
Of his different phases Iqbal himself wrote:
” I have myself been of he view hat religious differences should disappear from this country, and even now act on the principle, in my private life. But now I think that the preservation of their national identities is desirable for both the Hindus and the Muslims. The vision of a common nationhood for India is a beautiful idea, and has a poetic appeal, but looking to the present conditions and the unconscious trends of the two communities, appears incapable of fulfillment”.
By the year 1941 He was indeed a firm believer in Pakistan and the Two Nation Theory
” Cant you see that a Muslim, when he was converted more than a thousand years ago, bulk of them, then according to your hindureligion and philosophy, he becomes an outcast and he becomes aMalecha (an untouchable) and the Hindus ceased to have anythingto do with him socially , religiously , culturaly or in any otherway? He, therefore belongs to a different order not merely religiousbut social and he has lived in that distinctly separate and antagonostic social order, religiously, socially and culturally…can you posibally compare this with that nonsensical talk thatmere change of faith is no ground for a demand for Pakistan? Cantyou see the fundamantle difference ? “2 march 1941. Pres. address toPunjab Muslim Students Fed.
As can be seen from the above that the entire Muslim nation of India did not actually believe in “Pakistan” untill after the failure of the Cabinet Mission Plan. It was after the failure of the CMP that Quaid-e-Azam and the Muslim League had accepted that the MOVEMENT TOWARDS Pakistan or an independent Muslim state began. Earlier writings from Iqbal DO NOT DETRACT anything from Iqbal becasue as early as 1930 he WAS propogating a SEPERATE identity of the Muslims of India.Iqbal’s vs Goethe’s: Deja Vu in Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan
Nikal kay sehra say jis nay Roma ki saltanat ko ulat diya tha
Suna hai qudsiyon say main nay, wo sher phir hoshyar ho ga
Khuda kay bandey tou hain hazaron, banon main phirtey hain marey marey
Main uss ka banda banon ga jis ko Khuda kay bandon say pyar ho ga
(Meanings: saltanat = State; ulat = to conquer; Qudsiyon = fortune tellers; sher = lion (referring to Sultan Salah ud Din Ayubi and other brave Muslims); hoshyar = Attention; banon = forests)
CRITICISM OF IQBAL
Any good writing on Iqbal must discuss his criticism. Here is an Indian author trying to shred the Pakistan ideaology:
Much is made of Iqbal as the philospher of Partition. In this connection his address to the Allahabad Muslim League Session 1930 is lavishly quoted. The reader is never informed that the British had split the League into Shafi Leag-ue and Jinnah League, after League president Jinnah had decided to boycott the Simon Commission.
Iqbal was only presiding over the pro-British Shafi League, attended by less than a hundred delegates. Nor is the reader told that, in his later years, Iqbal thought better of Jawaharlal than of Jinnah and that he wrote to Edward Thomson (vide ‘Enlist India for Freedom’, p. 58) that “the Pakistan Plan would be disastrous to the British Government, disastrous to the Hindu community, disastrous to the Muslim community. But I am the President of the (Shafi) Muslim League and it is, therefore, my duty to support it”.
This is what Sanjeev Sharma says about Iqbal:
“Iqbal never was for a total separate state for Muslimsof India, he wanted them to have a self-determinationin federal republic of India, and even until hedied nowhere in his poems or anywhere we have anyevidence of his support for the dominion of a Pakistan outside of India, matter of the fact is thatonly after he died in 1938, Muslim league passeda resolution in 1940 at Lahore for a seperate stateof Pakistan, at that Jinnah was its leader.Iqbal, was a great poet no doubt about it, buta politician! no way, and Jinnah ,not only he failed to realized what will happen 40 years down but alsohe was directly responsible of 4-10 million murders,and largest migration of this history on earth. Again Iqbal, was never for this blood shed and migration, he insisted on the federal states ofindia, unlike Jinnah, who wanted to have a statefor him”.Criticism from the Religious Right Mualvi establishment
Iqbal was severely criticized for attacking the establishment. His book Zarb-e-Kaleem was titled “Declaration of War against the establishment of Today“. His articles, poems and anthologies attacked the status quo and asked the Muslims to raise their lot. His poems “Shikwah” and “Jawab-e-Shikwah” were severely criticized by the maulvis of his day. In “Shikwah” Iqbal complains to god about the poor lot of the Muslims, and in “Jawab Shikwah” Iqbal plays God and answers man. Many orthodox Muslims called Iqbal a “kafir” for this innovation in his poetry.
I consider “shikwah” good poetry. I wouldn’t have had it memorized otherwise. For the firebrand ideologue Shikwah has great inspirational power. But “shikwah” (together with most of Iqbal’s excellent poetry) has limited ideological appeal. If you are a Hindu, you’ll be disgusted by “shikwah”. (Remember the “muNh ke bal gir kay hua Allah aHad kehtay thay” part.) In a larger context I see this as a conflict between the classic ghazal and what they call “maqsadi sha’iri”.
German influence in Iqbal’s writings (Doctorate in Philosophy Germany 1905-1908)
Iqbal was greatly influenced by the German philosophers of his time, Soren Kierkegaard, Fredrick Wilhelm Nietzsche, and Schopenhauer. During his stay in Germany the ‘country’ (the Austro-Hungarian Empire and Prussia) was going though its great nationalistic binge. …..The Nazis used Nietzsche for building a nation that was defeated in war, was disarmed, was occupied and was split up into small portions. German states were trying to come together as a nation.
Iqbal’s response was that his inspiration was “Surah Hashar” of the Quran and not any other.
Iqbal was greatly influenced by the German’s nation attempt to re-construct itself. He thought he could transfer the concept to his homeland India. Iqbal is said to have been particularly affected by the German philosopher Nietzsche. Some have even accused him of plagiarizing German concepts. In Nietzsche’s famous Thus Spake Zaratustra (1883-85) Nietzsche “introduced in eloquent poetic prose the concepts of the superman and the will to power …. such a heroic man of merit has the courage … to rise above the masses. Some scholars compare Iqbal’s concepts of Mard-e-Momin to the Nietzsche ‘superman’, and Iqbal’s Khudi to Nietzsche’s will to power. There is no denying the influence of Nietzsche on Iqbal poetry. Iqbal was intelligent enough to use the German concepts for a positive purpose for his own people.
Comparison with Ghalib and Profoundness of Poetry
American research scholars like Marcus and Vonetta Franda have called Iqbal “One of the greatest poets of the Indian subcontinent “. However some researches have compared Iqbal to other great Indian poets like Ghalib, and have found Iqbal’s’ poems trite in comparison. The depth of Ghalib can not be found in Iqbal’s poetry. One Pakistani poet said “Iqbal’s poetry conveys a profound message but is not profound.”Perhaps Iqbal was writing for the common man, and did not want to complicate the message. Iqbal was on a mission. Ghalib, like Wordsworth, and Tennyson and others were poets without missions.
IQBAL AS FOUNDER OF PAKISTAN
Awami National Party leader Wali Khan waved a document at a teachers’s function to prove that poet Mohammad Iqbal had not conceived the idea of Pakistan. The document was a letter from the late poet in which he said he had never provided any idea about the creation of Pakistan.
The same letter reveals that it was Sir Zafarullah Khan who originally mooted the idea of a separate homeland for the Muslims of the sub-continent.
Source: UNI, June 1, 1996
Iqbal was one of the greatest sons of the subcontinent. He was born in the social, and political backwaters of the subcontinent, Sialkot, and acheived greatness in spite of his humble beginings. He galvanized a subdued and defeated nation who were under the yoke of British colonialism. The Muslims of the subcontinent of had lost their Mughal empire to the British, and and lost the economic and educational battle against the Hindus. The Hindus had gained a status in India that was of greater importance. The Muslims were truly third class citizens of India. Iqbal attempted and succeeded in combining the Muslims of different creeds, castes, and nd linguistic groups into a concept of nationhood based on Islam. Pakistan was but the inevitable result of his efforts.
IHSAN IBN ASLAM says about Iqbal:
I promised recently that I’d deal separately with this subject. So here it is! Lovely, juicy myths. Contrary to a widely held belief, Allama Iqbal did NOT propose an independent Muslim State in 1930.That was the demand of Choudhary Rahmat Ali in 1933. I make my point by reference to original sources, including a vital letter of Iqbal dated 1934 in which he disowned and disassociated himself from the Pakistan scheme.-Ihsan
IQBAL’S 1930 ADDRESS:
1. INTRODUCTION
All people have a tendency to exaggerate and to create myths around their heroes and historical events. One such myth is that which surrounds Allama Iqbal’s address in 1930. In this address, Iqbal is widely quoted as proposing the creation of an independent Muslim State. Renowned historians such as Prof. S. Wolpert and Dr Ishtiaq H. Qureshi, as well as writers such as Rajmohan Gandhi and almost every Pakistani commenting on this address is of this view. However, this view is NOT based on fact and is not supported either by the full and original text or by other statements by Iqbal himself. The view is based on *misquotes* from the address and unsupported *interpretations*. Here I look at the original text of the address and provide other relevant sources, particularly a vital, but little-known (ignored?), letter of Iqbal dated 1934. Iqbal was a brilliant poet, but politics was not his strength.
2. IQBAL’S ALLAHABAD ADDRESS
a) OVERVIEW
The article concerns Iqbal’s presidential address at the annual session of the All-India Muslim League held at Allahabad on December 29, 1930. The text of the address stretches just over 19 pages and is
divided into the following sections:
Islam and Nationalism
Muslim India within India
Federal States
The Simon Report
Hindu Machinations
The Problem of Defence
The Alternative
The Conclusion
The famous (mis)quote is from the section “Muslim India within India”, which speaks for itself. Had people even made a cursory glance at this address they would have seen that Iqbal is talking throughout about Muslims *within* India, ie. a part of the country India.
b) IQBAL’S MUSLIM INDIA WITHIN INDIA: THE 1930 QUOTE
“…Personally I would go further than the demands embodied in it[resolution of All-Parties Muslim Conference at Delhi in 1928concerning Muslim India within India]. I would like to see thePunjab, North-West Frontier Province, Sind and Baluchistan*amalgamated* into a *single state*. Self-Government within theBritish Empire, or without the British Empire, and the formation ofa consolidated North-West Indian *Muslim state* appears to me to bethe final destiny of the Muslims, at least of North-West India.The proposal was put forward before the Nehru Committee. Theyrejected it on the ground that, if, carried into effect, it wouldgive a very *unwieldy state*…Thus, possessing full opportunity ofdevelopment *within* the body-politic of India, the North-WestIndian Muslims will prove the best defenders of *India*…Nor shouldthe Hindus fear that the creation of *autonomous Muslim states*… I, therefore, demand the formation of a consolidated Muslim state inthe best interests of India and Islam…For India it meanssecurity and peace resulting from an *internal balance* of power…
c) COMMENTS BASED DIRECTLY UPON THE ADDRESS
The highlights in the quote above (*) have been added. Some points to bear in mind are the following:
(i) Though this was Iqbal’s presidential address to the Muslim League, he was not speaking *officially* for he prefixed his suggestion by “Personally I would…”. His personal proposal was not binding on the Muslim League, who never passed any resolution in support of it and did not adopt Iqbal’s idea as a policy.
(ii) The crucial misquote turns Iqbal’s “state” (small ‘s’) into “State” (capital ‘s’). Iqbal is using “state” as a synonym for “province” and not referring to State, as in an independent country. Note that he is speaking of “amalgamating” the four provinces for the “formation” of a larger “consolidated” “single state” within India.
(iii) In the proper context of the whole address the the “Self-Government within the British Empire, or without the British Empire” refers to India, of which Iqbal’s large Muslim province/state was an integral part of.
(iv) That he is talking of this province/state *within* India is quite obvious from the quote. Also, as noted above, this quote is headed “Muslim India within India”. Iqbal is speaking of Muslims “within the body-politic of India” and speaks of them defending India and the large Muslim province/state providing “internal balance of power”. It can only be “internal” if it was a part of India. The Nehru Committee rejecting this suggestion as an “unwieldy state”, obviously means a large, cumbersome province difficult to administer as a unit of India. A reading of the whole address bears this out. The section following this one is entitled “Federal States”, for example, which puts the proposal of the “redistribution of territory” for the formation large Muslim province/state into context: it’s a federal unit of India. In “Hindu Machinations” he mentions the Round Table Conference proposal for an “All-India Federation” for India.
3. IQBAL’S LETTER TO EDWARD THOMPSON
Crucial evidence clarifying Iqbal’s 1930 address came to light in 1979 with the publication of Iqbal’s letters to Edward Thompson of Oxford (Ahmad 1979). Almost all historians and writers have failed to refer to this vital source of information. Of the letters, one dated March 4, 1934 is the most important, since it deals directly with the issue. Without much ado, I’ll now let Iqbal speak for himself.
a) TEXT OF IQBAL’S LETTER OF 1934
—————————————————————-
Dr. Sir Mohd. Iqbal Kt. M. A., Ph.D.
Barrister-at-Law, Lahore
4th March 1934
My dear Mr. Thompson
I have just received your review of my book. It is excellent and I amgrateful to you for the very kind things you have said of me. But youhave made one mistake which I hasten to point out as I consider itrather serious. You call me [a] protagonist of the scheme called ‘Pakistan’. Now Pakistan is not my scheme. The one that I suggested in my address is the creation of a Muslims Province–i.e. aprovince having an overwhelming population of Muslims–in the North west of India. This province will be, according to my scheme,a part of the proposed Indian Federation. Pakistan scheme proposesa separate federation of Muslim Provinces directly related toEngland as a separate dominion. This scheme originated inCambridge. The authors of this scheme believe that we Muslim Round Tablers have sacrificed the Muslim nation on the altar of Hindu orso called Indian Nationalism
Yours sincerely,
Mohammad Iqbal
—————————————————————-
b) COMMENTS ON IQBAL’S LETTER OF 1934
(i) Note that he disassociates himself from the “serious” “mistake” of attributing the Pakistan idea to him.
(ii) This is the earliest evidence of Iqbal using the term “Pakistan”, which speaks of its wide and popular usage within a year of its invention (1933).
(iii) Iqbal clearly states that his 1930 proposal was to do with the “creation of a Muslim Province” as a “part of the proposed [Round Table Conference] Indian Federation“, i.e. not a separate Muslim State.
(iv) The Pakistan scheme “originated in Cambridge” and proposed a separate Muslim Federation of Muslim provinces. This proposal orginated in the Pakistan Declaration issued on January 28, 1933 from Cambridge and the movement launched by Choudhary Rahmat Ali (the only signatory of the Declaration from Cambridge). Iqbal must have read the Declaration. His last statement on the “Muslim Round Tablers“, of whom Iqbal was a *member*, comes from the Declaration, which condemned the Muslim members in no uncertain terms. Incidentally, Iqbal and Rahmat Ali met during Iqbal’s attendance of the Round Table Conferences in 1931 and 1932 (the Iqbal/Rahmat Ali relationship merits a separate post).
4. PAKISTAN DECLARATION (1933) ON IQBAL’S ADDRESS
In the letter above Iqbal comments on the 1933 Pakistan Declaration. Here is a relevant quote from the Declaration on Iqbal’s Address:
“This demand [for Pakistan, which included Kashmir] is basicallydifferent from the suggestion put forward by Doctor Sir MohammedIqbal in his Presidential address to the All-India Muslim League in1930. While he proposed the amalgamation of these Provinces into asingle state forming a unit of the All-India Federation, we proposethat these Provinces should have a separate Federation of theirown.” Self-explantory. 5. CONCLUSIONThere are other relevant sources which help understand Iqbal’s 1930 Address in the correct light (Ahmad 1942, Ali 1947, and see Aziz 1987 for detailed discussion). However, I think the above should be sufficient to dispel the myth that Iqbal proposed a separate Muslim State in his address. An explanation as to why the myth continues to be perpetrated lies party with the “founding party of Pakistan”, the All-India Muslim League, and partly with historians and other writers. Here is my interpretation, but first a list of important dates:
December 29, 1930: Iqbal’s Allahabad address
January 28, 1933: Rahmat Ali’s Pakistan Declaration
March 24, 1940: A-I Muslim League adopts Lahore Res.
August 14, 1947: Independence Day of Pakistan
After passing the Lahore (“Pakistan”) resolution in 1940, the League tried to find some sort of historical base for their decision after seven years of opposing Rahmat Ali’s Pakistan scheme.
Instead of acknowledging the 1933 Pakistan Declaration, which essentially remains unknown to this date, they jumped to Iqbal’s 1930 Allahabad address. Here, from their political perspective, they had two plus points: first, the address was by a renowned Muslim poet, who was later to be adopted officially as the “Poet of Pakistan”, and, second, the address was at the annual session of their party. As for their opposition to, and non-acknowledgement of, Rahmat Ali and his Movement, that is outside the scope of this article.The Allahabad myth is partly also due to poor scholarship, where reference is not made to original sources, and misquotes have led to misinterpretations or interpretations are made which are contrary to other relevant sources, including Iqbal’s own works. Iqbal did not “convert” to the idea of Pakistan until about 1937 when he wrote letters to the then President of the All-India Muslim League, Mohammed Ali Jinnah. It is said that about this time Iqbal expressed an interest to join Rahmat Ali’s Movement, but he died soon thereafter (Wasti 1982). In conclusion, then, Allama Iqbal did NOT propose an independent Muslim State in 1930. That is the stuff of the myth-makers.
REFERENCES
ALI, CHOUDHARY RAHMAT, 1933, “Now or Never: Are we to Live or Perish for Ever?”, Cambridge.
ALI, CHOUDHARY RAHMAT, 1947, “Pakistan: Fatherland of the Pak Nation”, Pakistan National Movement, Cambridge
AHMAD, KHAN A., 1942, “The Founder of Pakistan: From Trial to Triumph”, London. (The “Founder” referred to is Rahmat Ali.) AHMAD, S. HASAN, 1979, “Iqbal: His Political Ideas at the
Crossroads: A Commentary on Unpublished Letters to Professor Thompson”, Aligarh.
AZIZ, K.K., 1987, “A History of the Idea of Pakistan”, Vol.1, p.184-327, Vanguard, Lahore.
IQBAL, M., 1930, “Presidential Address”, _in_ RAIS AHMAD JAFRI (NADVI), (ed.), “Rare Documents”.
IQBAL, M., 1934, “Letter to E. Thompson dated March 4, 1934″ _in_Ahmad 1979, see above.
WASTI, S.M., 1982, “My Reminiscences of Choudhary Rahmat Ali”, Royal Book Co., Karachi, 175pp.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Cambridge University: The libraries of Emmanuel College, Centre of South Asian Studies, and the University. Shahid Karim
“The Muslims of India are suffering from two evils.The first is the want of personalities…By leadersI mean men who, by Divine gift or experience, possessa keen perception of the spirit and destiny of Islam,long with an equally keen perception of the trend of modern history. Such men are really the driving forces of a people, but they are God’s gift and cannot be made to order. The second evil from which the Muslims of India are suffering is that the ommunity is fast losing what is called the herd instinct.”
Source: Allama’s presidential address at the annual session of the All-India Muslim League held at Allahabad in 1930. Full text in “Rare Documents”.
POETRY OF IQBAL
From: abbas@seas.gwu.edu (Ali Abbas)
THE SlGNIFlCANCE OF ISLAMIC FREEDOM and SECRET OF THE KARBALA EVENT
Dr Mohammad Iqbal, the Poet of the East.
Whoever makes a covenant with the Omnipresent,
Is freed from the bondage of all (false) gods.
A believer’s existence is dependent on Love,
While Love, for its manifestation, is dependent on the believer,
What is impossible for mortals is rendered possible through Love.
Reason is ruthlessly sharp, but Love is sharper;
It is chaster, more shrewd, more daring.
Reason is lost in the maze of cause and effect;
Love is the champion in the field of action.
Love captures its prey through sheer strength;
While Reason captures through deceit by laying a snare.
Doubt and fear are the assets of Reason;
Self-Confidence and firmness of puryose are the integral
parts of Love.
Reason builds to destroy,
While Love destroys to re-create.
Reason has a little value like the air in this World,
Love is highly inestimable.
Reason is absorbed in questioss of how and how much;
Love in its purity transcends them.
Reason advises self-assertion,
While Love counsels self-examination.
Reason is indebted to other things for knowledge.
Love originates in grace (of God) and is contended with self
knowledge.
Reason says, Be happy and prosper,
While Love advises, Surrender thyself and be free.
Love finds both comfort and consolation in freedom,
Freedom is its source of guidance.
Have’nt you heard how summarily, on the occasion of the great conflict,
Love dealt with conceited Reason.
That Imam (Chief) of all lovers, the son of Fatima,
That cypress in the Prophet’s garden.
What a marvellous phenomenon ! (Husains) great
grand-father (Ishmael) set the first example of self sacrifice,
Whose meaning and significance became fully explicit
in him (Husain) the great grand-son.
For that Prince of ideal character (Husain),
The last Prophet offered his own shoulder as a substitute for
a camel’s back.
Love’s majestic visage glowing with pride because of
the blood of the martyred Husain,
The colourfulness of this line is due to the theme of martyrdom.
Husain’s unique position in the muslim community,
Is like the honoured place Occupied by the verse (Qul ho-Allah)
in the Quran.
Moses and Pharoah, Husain and Yazeed,
They are, but the conflicting forces of life.
Truth survives and triumphs because of Husain.
Falsehood is destined to meet with failure and grief.
At the moment when the leadership of the faithful broke the link with
the Quran,
Human freedom was poisoned in the blood.
There arose a man, the best of the best among nations,
Like a rain-laden eastern cloud, bringing water to a parched,
rocky soil.
This cloud rained for a moment on Karbala,
Causing the desert to bloom and passed on.
He (Husain) exterminated tyranny for ever,
From his martyred blood, there rose a new garden (of human values)
in the wilderness.
Writhing in dust and blood for defending truth,
He became the corner stone of “La Ilah”
Had Power been his objective,
He would have not set forth so ill-equipped.
His enemies were in multitude just like the sands of the desert,
While the number of his companions was equal to the numerical
value of the word Yezdan (72).
In him (Husain), the mystery of Abraham and Ishmael unfolds and expounds
itself.
He is the illustration of their faith.
His will was firm as a rock;
Swift and triumphant (like a river).
The sword was for him a weapon meant solely for the defence of the faith;
And the protection of the Divine Law.
The muslim owes allegiance to none but Allah.
His head never bows before a tyrant.
This was the secret that Husain unveiled with his blood.
And roused his people from slumber.
When he (Husain) unsheathed the sword of denial of false gods;
He caused the blood to flow from the veins of their supporters.
He inscribed the words Illallah on the desert sands of Karbala,
Thus, he imprinted the first line of the charter of our salvation.
It is from Husain that we have learnt the hidden meaning of the
Holy word (Quran).
The flames of burning faith we borrowed from his fire.
The splendour that was once Syria and Baghdad;
And the glory of Granada are all now a forgotten tale.
At the touch of Husain’s plectrum the strings of our being still vibrate;
His cry of Allah o Akbar still keeps our Faith alive.
O Wind! Thou messenger of far-flung people !
Present our tears to the sacred dust that covers Husain’s remains.
Shikwa-Jawab Shikwa Complaint and Answer Translated by:A.J. Arberry
This is what Khalid Muhammed Shahzad says about the poet of the East
The ‘Shikwa‘ and the ‘Jawab-i-Shikwa’, are among the most popular of Iqbal’s poems; they are deservedly celebrated, for they are among the first to bring their author fame as an advocate of Islamic reform and rebirth. The date of their compsition can be fixed very accurately by a reference to contemporary events contained in the second of them; when Iqbal wrote -
‘Now the onslaught of the Bulgars sounds the trumpet of alarm’ he was commemorating the invasion of Turkey by Bulgaria in the late autumn of 1912, an attack which threatened at one time to penetrate as far as Constantinople, the capital of the Ottoman Empire and the last home of the Caliphate.
These poems were therefore composed four years after Iqbal’s return from Europe. They mark the beginning of that remarkable career as philosopher and poet which brought Iqbal ever-increasing renown, until he was recognized as the leading thinker of ISLAM in India and the greatest figure in Urdu literature. It is all the more interesting to find him adumbrating in these early pieces that theory of Selfhood (Khudi) and Selflessness (Bekhudi) which later played such an important part in his religious and political philosophy.
The central theme of both poems is the decay of Islam from its former greatness, and the measures to be adopted if it was to re-establish its authority and regain its vitality. The subject was, of course, not a new one; ever since the decline and final extinction of the Moghul Empire, Muslims in India had been searching their minds and their consciences for the explanation of so lamentable a disaster. Nor were Indian Muslims alone in deploring the seeming collapse of Islamic civilization; their co-religionists further West, from Persia to Morocco, had been occupied with the same self-examination. But in these two poems Iqbal stated the problem in singularly arresting directness; the literary form chosen for its exposition, a dialogue between the poet, as a spokesman for Muslims the world over, and God – this dramatic presentation of the common dilemma made an immediate and compelling appeal to Iqbal’s public, an appeal moreover which has lost nothing of its force in the intervening years.
To make a worthy translation of these poems into English is certainly no easy task. To begin wuth, the translator ( A.J. Arberry) has to confess to a very inadequate knowledge of Urdu, the language used by Iqbal on this occasion. Left to his own devices, he would been obliged to abandon the attempt; but the publisher, Sh. M. Ashraf, procured for him a literal rendering of the originals into English prose, ably executed by Mazheruddin Siddiqi, to whom the grateful and cordial thanks of the writer are hereby expressed. But that is by no means the end of the matter; Iqbal naturally illustrated his discourse with metaphors and references familiar enough to those accustomed to read Urdu poetry, but in many instances utterly strange, indeed outlandish, to an English audience. Rather than impose on the poet transformations, of which he would certainly and justly have disapproved, the translator has preferred to reproduce his model as closely and as faithfully as he could, appending notes to his version to light up the dark passages wherever they are found.
Kiyu* ziya’ kar banu* sood framosh rahu* ?
(Why must I forever suffer loss, oblivious to gain ?)
Fikr-e-farda na karu* mehv-e-gham-edosh rahu*?
(Why think not upon the morrow, drowned in grief for yesterday ?)
Naale bubul ke sunu* aur hama tan gosh rahu*
(Why must I attentive heed the nightingale’s lament of pain ?)
Ham navaa! mai* bhi koi gul hoo* ke khamosh rahu* ?
(Fellow-bard! am I rose, dondemned to silence all the way?)
Jur’at aamoze miri taab-e-sukhan mujh ko
No; the burning power of song bids me be bold and not to faint;
Shikwa Allah(s.w.t.) se “khakam badahan” hai muhj ko Dust be in my mouth, but God – He is the theme of my complaint.
—————————————————————
The gallant Arab warriors were ready with their swords
The land of Syria was awaiting for them as a bride waits for
henna to be put on her
And also if Iqbal was not an Arab why he wrote a poem “Taariq ke Duaa”.
“The prayer of Taariq bin Ziyaad in the battlefield in Spain”. One verse
in that poem reads
KhayabaN mein hey muntazir lala kub sey
Qubaa chaheay iss ko khoon e arab se
The lala (a kind of flower) has been waiting for long in the garden
It needs its color from the blood of the Arabs
“Khitaab ba jawaanaan e Islam” in which he says to the young Muslim.
You have been reared by a nation
that crushed the crown of Darius under its feet
O what should I tell you of those desert dwellers
They were a people that overcame the whole world
They understood the world
They beautified the world
They took care of the wrold
They were the founders of the greatest civilization
They showed the world how to govern
And they were simply a people from the deserts of Arabia
i.e. the home of the camel herders
How dare Iqbal also says in one of his poems
I would let the hindu in India open his mouth
Only if he is not going to say anything derogatory about Arab leaders
Hasn’t our nation been taught the rule
To get close to Mohammad you have to get away from Abu Lahab
The world of Arabs is not founded on geographic boundaries
The world of Arabs is simply founded on belief in Mohammad
It is getting outrageous on part of Iqbal. Iqbal also said
If the Jews have a right over Palestine
Why don’t then the Arabs have a right over Spain
Iqbal said in one of his poems
I am descended from a pure Somnathi family.
My ancestors were true lovers and worshippers of Laat and Manaat
Note: Somnath was a big hindu temple about 1000 years ago.
Laat and manaat are names of two idols (gods) which have been
worshipped in some form or the other by all pagan people and
were the major attaraction in the Kaaba before Islam.
Here he talks about his Hindu lineage and that also from a pure Brahmin family.
So even though Iqbal’s ancestors had been stalwarts of Hinduism until a couple
hundred years ago the light of Islam had pentrated their hearts now. And there
is no turning back from the straight path once it has been found.
That is not all Iqbal also uses Khushaal Khan Khattak in a similar poem as “The advice of a Wise Baloch” to convey the message of self-respect and developing self-confidence in one’s self. The poem is titled “The advice of Khushaal Khan Khattak”. Also Iqbal has a whole set of twenty poems and ghazals under a section titled “Mehraab Gul Afghaan ke Afkaar”. Meaning “The thoughts of Mehraab Gul Afghaan”. I don’t know who Mehraab Gul was. But Iqbal uses his thoughts to teach something positive to everybody.So should we ask if Iqbal was a pure Pashtoon. If he was not then he cannot use the positive qualities of Pushtoons and teach them to others who lack them.In the world of people who are wrapped up in a shell of fake and hollow pride one human being cannot learn from another human being. In their world there are unpassable barriers to cultural interaction and social inter-course. But their fake world will not be able to withstand the onslaught of the true spirit of human civilization. If we would not be so blind to read our own histories of how our cultures have been formed. Culture is not something static. It is the most dynamic phenomenon known to man. If you come in the way of cultural intermingling you will only destroy yourself.Going back to Iqbal. Iqbal talked about ants, flowers, women, Turks, Arabs, Indians, Europeans, cows, goats, sqirrels, camels, mountains, rivers, Lenin, Mussolini and thousands of other things. And so has every other poet befor him and after him done the same, talk about things.I could talk about all the poets that have existed and because of their spirit of love and their preacing of cultural interaction their names (and message) will last till the end of the world. I could talk about Sachal Sarmast, Amir Khusro, Shah AbdulLatif Bhitai, Amir Karore, Bhulley Shah, Waaris Shah, Bahadur Shah. The message of all these people is the same. They use different words and different styles but they teach us the same message. That message is the brotherhood of mankind.I would use the words of Iqbal himself to conclude
BayaaN meiN nuktae tawheed to aa sakta hey
terey dimagh meiN butkhaana ho to kiya keheay
Yes! I can explain the idea of oneness of God to you
But if you have a whole temple full of idols in your head
what good it would do for me to explain allthat tawheed to you
This is what Nadeem Jamali says
Jang-e-yarmook… the poem is specifically about a certain warTariq bin Ziad… this is about what a particular person saidKhitab ba jawanaan….. here Iqbal is addressing MuslimsHindu…. Iqbal is expressing his feelingsPalestine… again Iqbal’s own feelingsIn the poem about the “Wise Baloch”, Iqbal is pretending to know how a wise Baloch thinks. He is not writing about one particular person… he’s trying to make a statement about the Baloch way of thinking in general. Unless he has based the poem on something, it is logical to raise the question. And mind you, I only asked if anyone knows the background.
This is what Khurram has contributed on Iqbal:
Majnun nay shehar chora tu sehra bhi chor dayNazaray ki havas ho to Laila bhi chor dayWa’iz kamal-i-tarak say milti hai ya’n muradDunya jo chor dee hai to Uqba bhi chor day
TRANSLATION:Majnun left the cities for the wilderness of the deserts, but you (O dervish) also renounce the latterIf you deire for ‘Mushahidas’ also give up your LailaO Preacher! Renunciation leads one to the goal on this path. Now that you have given up dunya also renounce the Hereafter
The essence of these verses is:
When a passionate desire (for his Lord) surges in the heart of a man
Then this wingless person gives birth to a Ruh-ul Amin within him
There’s a punjabi quadruplet on the same topic:
Zahid zuhd kamanday thakay rozay nafal namazaan HuAashiq gharq huay vich Wahdat fillah nal Muhabat razaan HuMakhi qaid shehad vich phati ki ur’si naal Shebazaan HuJinhan majlis naal Nabi Sarwar day Bahu O sahib raaz niazan HuThe ascetic died of rigorous prayers and attained paradise The Lover, in love for Allah, drowned in the ocean of Oneness and attained his LordA bee so caught in honey’s snares, how can it accompany the hawkBahu, those who attend the Holy Majlis of the Last messenger, they are the possessors of Divine knowledge
This is what Altaf Bhimji contibutes on Iqbal:
Excerpts from the Mysteries of Selflessness
A Philosophical Poem by Muhammad Iqbal
Translated, with Introduction and Notes by
Professor A.J.Arberry (First Edition 1953 –out of print)
Muhammad Iqbal (1876-1938) was not only the leading Urdu poet of his generation, but is considered by many as the spiritual founder of Pakistan. His writings were certainly most influential in preparing the way for the independence of Pakistan. As a philosopher and a thinker he is one of the greatest figures in modern Islam. In the Mysteries of Selflessness Iqbal puts forward his views on the relationship between the Individual and the State, of course from the Muslim standpoint, using the language and rich imagery of Persian poetry.
Dedication to the Muslim Community
You, who were made by God to be the Seal (i)Of all the peoples dwelling upon earthThat all beginnings might in you find end;Whose saints were prophetlike, whose wounded heartsWove into unity the soul of men;Why are you fallen now so far astrayFrom Mecca’s holy Kabba, all bemusedBy the strange beauty of the Christian’s way?The very skies are but a gatheringOf your street’s dust, yourselves the cynosureOf all men’s eyes; whither in restless hasteDo you now hurry like a storm-tossed wave,What new diversion seeking? No, but learn The mystery of ardor from the mothAnd make your lodgment in the burning flame;Lay Love’s foundation-stone in your own soul, And to the Prophet pledge anew your troth.My mind was weary of Christian company,When suddenly your beauty stood unveiled,My fellow-minstrel sang the epiphany (ii)Of alien loveliness, the lovelorn themeOf tresses and soft cheeks, and rubbed his browAgainst the saki’s door, rehearsed the chantOf Magian wenches. I would martyr beTo your brow’s scimitar, am fain to restLike dust upon your street. Too proud am ITo mouth base panegyrics, or to bowMy stubborn head to every tyrant’s courtTrained up to fashion mirrors out of words, I need not Alexander’s magic glass (iii)My neck endures not men’s munificence; Where roses bloom, I gather close the skirt Of my soul’s bud. Hard as the dagger’s steelI labor in life, my luster winFrom the tough granite. Though I am a sea,Not restless is my billow; in my handI hold no whirlpool bowl. A painted veilAm I, no blossom’s perfume-scattering, No prey to every billowing breeze that blows.I am a glowing coal within Life’s fire.And wrap me in my embers for a cloak.An now my soul comes suppliant to your doorBringing a gift of ardor passionate.A mighty water out of heaven’s deepMomently trickles o’er my burning breast,The which I channel narrower than a brookThat I may fling it in your garden’s dish.Because you are beloved by him I loveI fold you to me closely as my heart.Since Love first made the breast an instrumentOf fierce lamenting, by its flame my heartWas molten to a mirror; like a roseI pluck my breast apart, that I may hangThis mirror in your sight. Gaze you thereinOn your own beauty, and you shall becomeA captive fettered in your tresses’ chain.I chant again the tale of long ago,To be your bosom’s old wounds bleed anew. So for a people no more intimateWith its own soul I supplicated God,That He might grant to them a firm-knit life.In the mid watch of night, when all the worldWas hushed in slumber, I made loud lament;My spirit robbed of patience and repose,Unto the Living and Omnipotent GodI made my litany; my yearning heartSurged, till its blood streamed from my weeping eyes“How long, O Lord, how long the tulip-glow,The begging of cool dewdrops from the dawn?Lo, like a candle wrestling with the nightO’er my own self I pour my flooding tears.”I spend my self, that there might be more light,More loveliness, more joy for other men.Not for one moment takes my ardent breastRepose from burning; Friday does not shame (iv)My restless week of unremitting toil.Wasted is now my spirit’s envelope;My glowing sigh is sullied all with dust.When God created me at Time’s first dawnA lamentation quivered on the stringsOf my melodious lute, and in that noteLove’s secrets stood revealed, the ransom-priceOf the long sadness of the tale of Love;Which music even to sapless straw impartsThe ardency of fire, and on dull clayBestows the daring of the reckless moth.Love, like the tulip, has one brand at heart, And on its bosom wears a single rose;And so my solitary rose I pinUpon your turban, and cry havoc loudAgainst your drunken slumber, hoping yetTulips may blossom from your earth anewBreathing the fragrance of the breeze of Spring.
Notes:
(i) Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) being commonly called the Seal of the Prophets because in him God concluded His series of revelations to manking. Iqbal borrows the term and refers to the
Islamic community as the Seal of the Peoples.
(ii) The reference is to the continuing fashion among Urdu poets to imitate the conventional love-lyrics of Persia in which the images mentioned are very common.
(iii) Alexander the Great is said in Persian legend to have possessed a magic mirror in which he saw the whole world at a glance.
(iv) Friday being the day for Muslim congregational prayer.
ADDITION TO IQBAL
“Jang-e-yarmook ka aik waaqiah”.
The first verse of that poem can be translated as:
The gallant Arab warriors were ready with their swords
The land of Syria was awaiting for them as a bride waits for henna to be put on her
“The prayer of Taariq bin Ziyaad in the battlefield in Spain”. One verse in that poem reads
KhayabaN mein hey muntazir lala kub sey
Qubaa chaheay iss ko khoon e arab se
The lala (a kind of flower) has been waiting for long in the garden
It needs its color from the blood of the Arabs
“Khitaab ba jawaanaan e Islam” in which he says to the young Muslim.
You have been reared by a nation that crushed the crown of Darius under its feet
O what should I tell you of those desert dwellers
They were a people that overcame the whole world
They understood the world
They beautified the world
They took care of the wrold
They were the founders of the greatest civilization
They showed the world how to govern
And they were simply a people from the deserts of Arabia i.e. the home of the camel herders
Iqbal also says in one of his poems
I would let the hindu in India open his mouth
Only if he is not going to say anything derogatory about Arab leaders
Hasn’t our nation been taught the rule
To get close to Mohammad you have to get away from Abu Lahab
The world of Arabs is not founded on geographic boundaries
The world of Arabs is simply founded on belief in Mohammad
Iqbal. Iqbal also said
If the Jews have a right over Palestine
Why don’t then the Arabs have a right over Spain
The people who ask such questions about who was who should first come out of their shell of fake ethnic pride and unfouded sense of superiortity.
Iqbal was a poet and a sensitive human being. You donot have to be a flower to talk about a flower. You donot have to be an ant to talk about an ant.
You donot have to be a horse to talk about a horse. You do not have to be god to talk about god.
A poet uses everyday things to convey his message to us. That is why Iqbal used the “Wise Baloch” to teach us the wise stuff.
Going back to Iqbal being an Arab for a moment. Iqbal said in one of his
poems
I am descended from a pure Somnathi family
My ancestors were true lovers and worshippers of Laat and Manaat
note: Somnath was a big hindu temple about 1000 years ago.
Laat and manaat are names of two idols (gods) which have been
worshipped in some form or the other by all pagan people and
were the major attaraction in the Kaaba before Islam.
Here he talks about his Hindu lineage and that also from a pure Brahmin family. So even though Iqbal’s ancestors had been stalwarts of Hinduism until a couple hundred years ago the light of Islam had pentrated their hearts now. And there is no turning back from the straight path once it has been found.
That is not all Iqbal also uses Khushaal Khan Khattak in a similar poem as “The advice of a Wise Baloch” to convey the message of self-respect and developing self-confidence in one’s self. The poem is titled “The advice of Khushaal Khan Khattak”. Also Iqbal has a whole set of twenty poems and ghazals under a section titled “Mehraab Gul Afghaan ke Afkaar”. Meaning “The thoughts of Mehraab Gul Afghaan”. I don’t know who Mehraab Gul was. But Iqbal uses his thoughts to teach something positive to everybody.
So should we ask if Iqbal was a pure Pashtoon. If he was not then he cannot use the positive qualities of Pushtoons and teach them to others who lack them.
TAWHID
I would use the words of Iqbal himself to conclude
BayaaN meiN nuktae tawheed to aa sakta hey
terey dimagh meiN butkhaana ho to kiya keheay
Yes! I can explain the idea of oneness of God to you
But if you have a whole temple full of idols in your head
what good it would do for me to explain all that tawheed to you
Excerpts from the Mysteries of Selflessness By Muhammad Iqbal
Translated by A. J. Arberry.
The story of Bu Ubaid and Jaban, in Illustration of Muslim Brotherhood
A certain general of King Yazdajird
(i) Became a Muslim’s captive in the wars;A Guebre he was, inured to every trickOf fortune, crafty, cunning, full of guile.He kept his captor ignorant of his rankNor told him who he was, or what his name,But said, ” I beg that you will spare my lifeAnd grant to me the quarter of Muslims gain.”The Muslim sheathed his sword. “To shed thy blood”,He cried, “were impious and forbidden sin.”When Kaveh’s banner had been rent to shreds,
(ii)The fire of Sasan’s sons turned all to dust
(iii)It was disclosed the captive Jaban was,Supreme commander of the Persian host.Then was his fraud reported, and his bloodPetitioned of the Arab general;Bu Ubaid, famed leader of the ranksFrom far Hejaz, who needed not the aidOf armies to assist his bold resolveIn battletide, thus answered their request.“Friends, we are Muslims, strings upon one luteAnd of one concord. Ali’s voice attunes With Abu Dharr’s, although the throat be that of Qanbar or Bilal. Each one of us
(iv)Is trustee to the whole CommunityAnd one with it, in malice or in truce.As the Community is the sure baseOn which the individual rests secure,So is its covenant his sacred bond.Though Jaban was a foeman to Islam,A Muslim granted him immunity;His blood, O followers of the best of men,May not be spilled by any Muslim sword.”____
i) Yazdajird was the last Sassanian king of Persia
ii)Kaveh, a smith of Isphan, raised the standard of revolt against the usurping tyrant Zahhak and established Feridun on the throne of Persia.iii)Sasan was the eponymous founder of the Sassanian dynasty,overthrown at the Arab conquest of Persia.iv)Qanbar, formerly a slave, was manumitted by caliph Ali. Bilal, formerlyan Abyssinan slave, was taken by the Prophet at the muezzin.
Excerpts from the Mysteries of Selflessness By Muhammad Iqbal Translated by A. J. Arberry.
The story of Sultan Murad and the Architect, in Illustration of Muslim Equality
An architect there was, that in Khojand Was born, a famous craftsman of his kindWorthy to be an offspring of Farhad.Sultan Murad commanded him to buildA mosque, that which pleased not his majesty,So that he waxed right furious at his faults.The baleful fire flared in the ruler’s eyes;Drawing his dagger, he cut off the handOf that poor wretch, so that the spurting bloodGushed from his forearm. In such hapless plightHe came before the cadi, and retoldThe tyrant’s felony, that had destroyedThe cunning hand which shaped the granite rock.‘O thou whose words a message are of Truth”He cried, “whose toil it is to keep aliveMuhammad’s Law, I am no ear-bored slavePatient to wear the ring of monarchs’ might.Determine my appeal by the Quran!”The upright cadi bit his lips in ireAnd summoned to his court the unjust kingWho, hearing the Quran invoked, turned paleWith awe, and came like any criminalBefore the judge, his eyes cast down in shame,His cheeks as crimson as the tulip’s glow.On one side stood the appellant, and on oneThe high exalted emperor, who spoke.“I am ashamed of this that I have wroughtAnd make confession of my grievous crime.”“In retribution”, quoth the judge, “is life,And by the law life finds stability.The Muslim slave no less is than free menNor is the emperor’s blood of richer hueThan the poor builder’s.” Listening to these words Of Holy Writ, Murad shook off his sleeveAnd bared his hand. The plaintiff thereuponNo longer could keep silence. “God commandsJustice and kindliness,” recited he.“For God’s sake, and Muhammad’s,” he declared,“I do forgive him.” Note the majestyOf the Apostle’s Law, and how an antTriumphantly outfought a Solomon!Before the tribunal of the QuranMaster and slave are one, the mat of reedsCoequal with the throne of rich brocade.QUAID
>*16 November: Choudhary Rahmat Ali Day*
Munir M. Pervaiz contributions on Iqbal’s humor:
Shaikh sahib bhi to pardey kay ko’i haami naheeN
Muft meiN college kay larkey unn say bad zan ho gaey
Wa’az meiN farma diya kal aap nay yeh saaf saaf“
Parda aakhir kiss say ho jab mard hi zan ho gaey”
*******Woh miss boli iraada khood kushi ka jab kiya meiN nay
Mohazzab hay to ay aashiq, qadam bahar na dhhar had say
Na jur’at hay na khanjar hay,to qasd e khood kuushi kaisa
Yeh maana dard e naa kaami gaya tera guzar had say
Kaha meiN kay” ay jan e jahaaN kuchh naqd dilwa do
Kiraaey par manga loonga ko’i afghaan sarhad say”
****************Takraar thhi mazaar’e o maalik meiN aik rauz
Dono yeh keh rahey thhey mera maal hay zameeN
Kehta thha woh, karey jo zaraa’at ussi ka khait
Kehta thha yeh, kay aql thikaaney teri naheeN
Pochha zameeN say meiN kay , hay kiss ka maal too
Boli mujhhey to hay faqat iss baat ka yaqeeN
Maalik hay ya mazaar’a e shoreeda haal hayJ
o zeir e aasmaaN hay woh dharti ka maal hay —-Ta abad aadmi ko dunya meiN
Zindigi ka khiraaj deina hayTifl e nau za’ida ko kal say mujhhey
Zehr e rasm o riwaaj deina hay
Another poem from Allama Iqbal’s Baal e jibra’eel for lovers of great Urdu poetry:
PANJAB KAY PEER ZAADON SAY
Hazir hua meiN sheikh e mujaddid ki lehd par
Woh khaak kay hay zeir e falak matla e anwaar
Iss khaak kay zarroN say heiN sharminda sitaarey
Iss khaak meiN posheeda hay woh sahib e israr
Gardan na jhukee jiss ki jahaangir kay aagey
Jiss kay nafas e garm say hay garmi e ahraar
Woh hind meiN sarmaya e millat ka nigehbaaN
Allah nay bar waqt kiya jiss ko khabardaar
Ki arz yeh meiN nay kay ata faqr ho mujhh ko
AankheiN meri beena heiN wa lekin naheeN baidaar
Aaee yeh sada silsila e faqr hua bandHei
N ahl e nazar kishwar e punjaab say baizaar
Aarif ka thikaana naheeN woh khitta kay jiss meiN
Paida kulah e faqr say ho turra e dastaar
Baqi kulah e faqr say thha walwala e haq
TurroN nay charhaya nasha e khidmat e sarkaar
Merey jism o rooh to kab kay, dhoop meiN jal kar raakh huey
Tuum jinn say miltey rehtey ho, woh to merey saaey heiN
PUNJABI MUSSALMAN
Mazhab meiN bohat taaza pasand iss ki tabi’atKar lay kahiN manzil to guzarta hay bohat jaldTahqeeq ki baazi ho to shirkat nahiN kartaHo khail mureedi ka to harta hay bohat jald !Taaweel ka phanda koi sayyad lagaa dayYeh shaakh e nasheman say utarta hay bohat jald !
GADAAI
Maikaday meiN aik din ik rind e zeerak nay kahaHay hamaaray shehr ka waali gadaa e bay hayaTaaj pehnaya hay kiss ki bay kulaahi nay ussayKiss ki uryaani nay bakhshi hay ussay zarreeN qabaUss kay aab e laala gooN ki khoon e dehqaaN say kasheedTerey merey khait ki matti hay uss ki keemyaUss aky nemat khaaney ki har cheez hay maangi hoeeDeney waala kaun hay ? mard e ghareeb o bay nawaMaangnay waala gada hay sadqa maangey ya khiraajKoi maaney yaa na maaney meer o sultaN sab gada
The following is a reproduction in toto of a letter written by Iqbal to the editor of the London Times, dated October 15, 1931. //
NORTH-WEST INDIA- MOSLEM PROVINCES
TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES
Sir,-Writing in your issue of October 3 last, Dr. E. Thompson has torn the following passage from its context in my presidential address to the All-India Moslem League of last December, in order to serve as evidence of “Pan-Islamic plotting”:- /
I would like to see the Punjab, North-West Frontier Province, Sind, and Baluchistan amalgamated into a single State. Self-government within the British Empire or without the British Empire, the formation of a consolidated North-West Indian Moslem State appears to me to be the final destiny of the Moslems, at least of North-West India./
May I tell Dr. Thompson that in this passage I do not put forward a “demand” for a Moslem State outside the British Empire, but only a guess at the possible outcome in the dim future of the mighty forces now shaping the destiny of the Indian sub-continent. No Indian Moslem with any pretence to sanity contemplates a Moslem State or series of States in North-West India outside the British Commonwealth of Nations as a plan of practical politics.
Although I would oppose the creation of another cockpit ofcommunal strife in the Central Punjab, as suggested by some enthusiasts, Iam all for a redistribution of India into provinces with effective majorities of one community or another on lines advocated by the Nehru and the Simon reports. Indeed, my suggestion regarding Moslem provinces merelycarries forward this idea. A series of contented and well-organized Moslem provinces on the North-West Frontier of India would be the bulwark of India and the British Empire against the hungry generations of the Asiatic highlands.
Yours faithfully,
MUHAMMED IQBAL.
St. James’s court, S.W.1, Oct. 10.//
The delegation is led by Khalid Jaffar, Press Assistant to the Malaysian Deputy Prime MinisterAnwar Ibrahim,Raja Rajaratnam,N.V.Raman and Anwar Tahir who are all members of theResearch Institute. Briefing the newsmen on Saturday, Rajaratnam said the Conference will be the second of the seriesdesigned to highlight the accomplishments of the Asian scholars and intellectuals. He said the title of the upcoming conference is ‘Muhammad Iqbal and the Asian Renaissance.’ Rajaratnam said experts drawn from various countries will read papers on Iqbal and hisworks.Some of the topics are Iqbal:Worldview,Metaphysics and Mysticism,Iqbal onReform,Justice,Polity & Ethnic Relations, Iqbal and the Muslim World,Iqbal:East,West and the Renaissance.
Malaysia organising conference on Iqbal LAHORE (APP) — The Institute for Policy Research, Malaysia,is organising an internationalconference on poet philosopher Allama Muhammad Iqbal at Selangor from June 3 to 5. The three-day conference will highlight the works and achievements of the poet of the East . A four-member delegation of the Institute for Policy Research is currently visiting Pakistan to seekthe Government’s help in procuring various works of Iqbal for display during the conference.
He said the Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has been invited to deliver keynote address on the openingday of the conference. The Malaysian scholar disclosed that an exhibition will also be organised on the occasion, displayingAllama Iqbal’s publications, books, manuscripts and photographs. Rajaratnam said Iqbal was a well known figure in his country especially among the Muslims and theconference has been designed to project him as an Asian thinker in the East Asia. ‘ The occasion will provide an excellent opportunity for scholars from other countries to exchange
Guftaar-e-syasat main watan aur hi kuch hai
Irshaad-e-Naboo’at (PBUH) main watan aur hi kuch hai
(Meanings: Guftaar-e-syasat = inpolitical terms; Irshad-e-Naboo’at (PBUH) = Sayings of Muhammad (PBUH))
*. Apney parwanon ko phir zoq-e-khud afrozi dey
Barq-e-daireena ko farman-e-jigar sozi dey
(Praying to God) (Meanings: Parwanon = Believers; zoq-e-khud afrozi = sense of self respect; Barq-e-daireena = Strength of old times; farman-e-jigar sozi = Faith)
*. Aankh ko baydaar ker dey wada-e-deedar say
Zinda ker dey dil ko soz-e-johar-e-guftaar say
(Praying to God) (Meanings: Aankh = vision; baydaar = conscious; wada-e-deedar = Promise of keeping true Faith; soz-e-johar-e-guftar = Faith)
*. Shab guraizan ho gi aakhir jalwa-e-khursheed say
Ye chaman mamoor ho ga naghma-e-Tauheed say
(Meanings: Shab guraizan ho gi aakhir jalwa-e-khursheed say = Sunshine will dominate the darkness of night eventually; chaman = referring to Islam; mamoor = blessed; naghma-e-tauheed = Islam)
*. Dilon ko markez-e-mehr-o-wafa ker
Hareem-e-Kibriya say aashna ker
Jissey nan-e-jaween bakhshi hai Tu nay
Ussey bazo-e-Haider bhi ata ker
(praying to God) (Meanings: Dilon = Hearts/insights/thoughts; markaz-e-mehr-o-wafa = Center of love and loyalty; Hareem-e-Kibriya = God; aashna = Familiar; Nan-e-jaween = determination; Bazu-e-Haider = Strength and faith of Ali (may Allah be pleased with him))
*. Zameer-e-lala main roshan chiragh-e-aarzu ker dey
Chamman kay zarrey zarrey ko shaheed-e-justaju ker dey
(Praying to God) (Meanings: Zameer-e-lala = Insight of Muslims; roshan = enlighten; chiragh-e-aazru = Lamp of hopes; zarrey = each part; shaheed-e-justaju = strive to be stronger)
*. Bazu tera Tauheed ki quat say qawi hai
Islam tera des hai, tu Mustafawi hai
Nizara-e-daireena zamaney ko dikha dey
Aey Mustafawi! khaak main iss bu’t ko mila dey
(Meanings: Qawi = strong; des = country; Mustafawi = Referring to Muslims here; Nizara-e-daireena = Old times when Muslims used to be the most united and strong power)
*. Phir dilon ko yaad aa jayey ga paigham-e-sajood
Phir jabeen khaak-e-Haram say aashna ho jayey gi
Aankh jo kuch dekhti hai, lab pay aa sakta nahin
Mehw-e-hairat hon kay duniya kya say kya ho jayey gi
(Meanings: paigham-e-sajood = Message of Muhammad (PBUH); jabeen = foreheads; khak-e-Haram = referring to worship of Allah; lab = lips; mehw-e-hairat = amazed)
CONCEPT OF KHUDI
Nigah-e-faqr main shaan-e-sikandari kya hai?
Khiraaj ki jo gada ho, wo qaiseri kya hai?
Falaq nay ki hai ata un ko khaajgi kay jinhain
Khabar nahin rawish-e-banda parwari kya hai?
Kissey nahin hai tamanna-e-sarwari lekin
Khudi ki mout ho jis main, wo sarwari kya hai?
Buton say tujh ko umeedain, Khuda say no meedi
Mujhey bata tou sahi aur kaafri kya hai?
(Meanings: Nigah-e-Faqr main shan-e-sikandari kya hai = What is the worth of kingdom in eyes of a saint?; Khiraj ki jo gada ho, wo qeseri kya hai = Such a rule in which ruler is always worried about keeping it secure, is worthless; Falaq = Nature; Khaajgi = Ruling class; Khabar nahin = Ignored; rawish-e-banda parwari = Sense of serving humanity; tamanna-e-sarwari = Desires to rule; Khudi ki mout ho jis main wo sarwari kya hai = Such rule is insulting to gain which, self respect is required to be sacrificed; Buton = Idols (referring to fellow human beings here); umeedain = Expectations; no meedi = Disappointment; Kaafri = Non Muslim who donot believe in Oneness of God)
*. Aey Tair-e-Lahooti, uss rizq say mout achi
Jis rizq say aati ho, parwaz main kotahi
Aain-e-jawanmardi, haq goi-o-bay baaqi
Allah kay sheron ko, aati nahin rubaahi
(Meanings: Tair-e-Lahooti = Simile, addressing to Muslim youth; Rizq = food/income; Kotahi = Laziness, denotatively and connotatively referring to slavery here; Aain-e-Jawanmardi = Conditions to live with dignity; Haq goi = Honesty; Bay Baaqi = Bravery; Rubaahi = cunningness, hypocrisy)
*. Hai Fikr mujhey misra-e-saani ki zyada
Allah karey tujh ko ata Fuqr ki talwaar
Jo haath main ye talwaar bhi aa jayey tou Momin
Ya Khalid-e-Janbaaz hai, Ya Haider-e-Karrar
(Meanings: misra-e-saani = proceeding verse; Fuqr ki talwar = Strong Faith; Khalid-e-Janbaaz = Khalid Bin Waleed (May Allah be pleased with him); Haider-e-Karrar= Ali Ibn-e-Abu Talib (May Allah be pleased with him))
*. Wo kal kay gham-o-aish per kuch Haq nahin rakhta
Jo aaj khud afroz-o-jigar soz nahin hai
Wo qaum nahin laiq-e-hangama-e-farda
Jis qaum ki taqdeer main imroz nahin hai
(Meanings: gham-o-aish = thick n’ thin; khud afroz-o-jigar soz = A person with motivation and determination; Laiq-e-hangama-e-farda = worthy to survive anymore; imroz = Present)
*. Paani paani ho gaya sun ker Qalander ki ye baat
Tu jhuka jab ghair key aagey, na tann tera na mann
Apney mann main dub kay pa ja suragh-e-zindagi
Tu agar mera nahi banta, na ban, apna tou bann
(Meanings: paani paani ho gaya = ashamed of oneself; Qalander = Saint; Ghair = Stranger (British here); tann and mann = Body and Soul; suragh-e-zindagi = Connotatively referring to secrets to live prestigious life)
(Meanings: Khana-e-sheesha-e-farang = Referring to British here; Sifaal-e-Hind = Referring to former united India (sub contient) here; Meena-o-jaam = Referring to necessities of life here; Chasshmey = Denotatively means fountains but connotative meanings here, referring to obstacles; Sang-e-rah = Track/path; Phootey = Emergence; Zarb-e-Kaleem = Powerful Strike)
*. Nahin tera nash-e-mann kasr-e-sultani kay gumband per
Tu Shaheen hai basera ker paharon ki chatanon per
(Meanings: nash-e-mann = home; kasr-e-sultani = denotatively, it stands for royal palace but here, it means ease and laziness; Basera = Shelter; Chatanon = Rocks)
*. Aghyaar kay ufkaar-o-takhayyul ki gadai
Kya tujh ko nahin apni khudi tak bhi rasai?
(Meanings: Aghyaar = Referring to British; Ufkaar = Policies; Takhayyul = Theories; Gadai= to beg; rasai = access)
*. Khudi ko ker buland itna kay her taqdeer say pehley
Khuda bandey say khud poochey bata teri raza kya hai
*. Ghulami main na kaam aati hain shamsheerain, na tadbeerain
Jo ho shok-e-yaqeen paida tou cut jaati hain zanjeerain
Koi andaza ker sakta hai iss kay zor-e-bazu ka?
Nigha-e-mard-e-momin say badal jati hain taqdeerain
(Meanings: Ghulami = Slavery; Shamsheerain = Swords; Tadbeerain = Plannings; Shok-e-yaqeen = Sense of self respect; Zanjeerain = restraints; Andaza= Guess; Zor-e-Bazu= Strength; Nigah-e-Mard-e-Momin = Glare of a Muslim (connotatively referring to strength of a strong faith Muslim); Taqdeerain = Destiny)
MESSAGE FOR MUSLIMS
Quran main ho ghota zan, aey mard-e-Msualman
Allah karey tujh ko ata jiddat-e-kirdaar
Jo harf-e-Qul il afw main posheeda hai ab tak
Iss dour main shayad wo haqeeqat ho namudaar
(Meanings: ghota zan = Referring to read, consult and understand; Jiddat-e-Kirdaar = Strong faith/strong character; Harf-e-Qul il afw = Words of Quran; Posheeda = Hidden; Namudar = To expose)
*. Aashna apni Haqeeqat say ho, aey dehqan zara
Dana tu, kheti bhi tu, baran bhi tu, haasil bhi tu
Khauf-e-batil kya hai, kay hai ghaarat-e-batil bhi tu
(Meanings: Aashna = Familiarity; Dehqan = Hard worker/ ploughman; Dana = Fruit; Kheti = Final product; Baran = Blessed rain; Haasil = Reward; Justaju = Struggle denotatively but referring to “wait” here; awara = useless; Rah = Passage; Rahru = Passenger; Rehber = Guide; Manzil = Destination; Kanpta = To shiver; Andesha-e-tufan = Fear of thunder; Nakhuda = Sailor; Beher = Ocean; Kashti = Ship; Sahil = Bank of ocean; Shola = Flame; phoonk dey = Eliminate; Khashak-e-ghair Allah = Enemies of God; Khauf-e-batil = Fear of Oppression; Ghaarat-e-Batil = One who eliminates oppressor and oppression)
*. Aaj bhi ho jo Baraheem ka Imaan paida
Aag ker sakti hai andaz-e-gulistan paida
(Meanings: Baraheem = Abraham (PBUH); Imaan = Faith; Andaz-e-gulistan = Referring to miracle of Prophet Ibraheem (Abraham PBUH), who was thrown in fire and fire was converted into the roses)
*. Baykhatar kood para aatish-e-namrood main Ishq
Aqal hai mehw-e-tamasha-e-lab-e-baam abhi
Shewa-e-Ishq hai Azadi-o-deher aashubi
Tu hai zannari-e-bu’t khana-e-ayyam abhi
(Meanings: Baykhatar = Fearlessly; Kood para = Jumped in; Aatish-e-Namrood = Referring to fire of Namrood in which, prophet Abraham (PBUH) was thrown; Ishq = Referring to strong Faith and devotion of Prophet Abraham (PBUH); Aqal = Wisdom; Mehw-e-tamasha-e-lab-e-baam = Stunned/shocked/in state of disbelief; Shewa-e-Ishq = Strong Faith; Azadi = Freedom; Deher Aashubi = To get rid of slavery; Zannari-e-bu’t khana-e-ayyam = Under influence of idol worshipers)
*. Dekh ker rang-e-chamman ho na pareshan maali
Kaukab-e-ghuncha say kirnain hai chamakney wali
Khas-o-khashaak say hota hai gulistan khali
Gul ber andaz hai khoon-e-shuhda ki lali
Rang gardun ka zara dekh tou, unnabi hai
Ye nikaltey huey Suraj ki ufuk taabi hai
(Meanings: Rang-e-chamman = Referring to downtrodden enslaved Muslim nation; Pareshan = Worried, Maali = Referring to worried Muslims; Kaukab-e-ghuncha = Referring to new buds; Kirnain = Ray of shining light; Chamakney = Brightness; Khas-o-Khashaak = Trash/garbage; Gulistan = Referring to Muslim circle here; Gul ber Andaz = About to blossom; Khoon-e-Shuhda ki lali = Blood/sacrifices of martyrs; Gardun = Sky; Unnabi = Golden/colour of rising dawn; Nikaltey huey Suraj = Rising dawn; Ufuk taabi = Signs)
*. Hai jo hangama bapa yorish-e-balghari ka
Ghafilon kay liyey paigham hai baydari ka
Tu samjhta hai, ye saman hai dil azaari ka
Imtihan hai terey eesaar ka, khuddari ka
Kyon hirasan hai saheel-e-fars-e-aada sey?
Noor-e-Haq bujh na sakey ka nafs-e-aada sey
(Meanings: Hangama bapa yorish-e-balghari ka = Inclination of world towards atheist culture; Ghafilon kay liyey paigham hai baydari ka = Message to get up from slumber for ignored ones; Saman = Matter; Dil Azaari = To offend, to hurt; Imtihan = Test; Eesaar = Sacrifice; Khuddari = Self Respect; Hirasan = Scared of; Saheel-e-fars-e-ada = Oppressor; Noor-e-Haq = Ligh of Truth; Nafs-e-aada = Struggle of oppressor)
*. Misl-e-bu qaid hai ghncey main, pareshan ho ja
Rakht ber dosh hawa-e-chaminstan ho ja
Hai tinak maya, tu zarrey say byabaan ho ja
Naghma-e-moj say hangama-e-tufan ho ja
Quat-e-Ishq say her past ko bala ker dey
Deher main Ism-e-Muhammad (PBUH) say ujala ker dey
(Meanings: Misl-e-bu = Referring to true faith here; Qaid= Bound; Ghunchey= Bud; Rakht ber dosh hawa-e-chamnistan = Advising to start making efforts against oppressor; zarrey say bayaban = From zero to hero; Naghma-e-moj = Unity; Hangama-e-tufan = Revolutionary strength; Quat-e-Ishq = Referring to strong faith; past = Low/slave; Bala = Respected; Deher = Times of slavery; Ism-e-Muhammad (PBUH) = Advising to follow teachings of Muhammad (PBUH); Ujala = End of oppression)
*. Aqal hai teri saper, Ishq hai shamsheer teri
Merey derwesh! khilafat hai Jahangir teri
Ma siwa Allah kay liyey aag hai takbeer teri
Tu Musalman ho tou taqdeer hai tadbeer teri
Ki Muhammad (PBUH) say wafa tu nay, tou Hum terey hain
Ye Jahan cheez hai kya, loh-o-qalam terey hain
(Meanings: Aqal = Wisdom; Ishq = Faith; Shamsheer = Strength/tool/sword; Derwesh = Innocent man; Khilafat = System of Pious Caliphs of Islam; Jahangir = Way out; Ma siwa = Except; aag hai takbeer teri = Your destiny is hell fire; Taqdeer = Luck; Tadbeer = Policy; Wafa = Sincerity/loyalty; Hum = Referring to Allah as Dr. Iqbal is assuming that Allah is addressing His creature; Jahan = World; Loh-o-Qalam = Universe)
*. Uth kay ab bazm-e-jahan ka aur hi andaaz hai
Mashriq-o-maghrib main terey dour ka aghaaz hai
(Meanings: bazm-e-jahan = Present era; Mashriq-o-Maghrib = Across the globe; Aaghaz = Beginning)
*. Yaqeen muhkam; amal paiham, mohabbat fath-e-alam
Jihad-e-zindagani main hain ye mardon ki shamshirain
(Meanings: Yaqeen muhkam= Confidence; Amal paiham = Hard work with strong motivation; Mohabbat fath-e-Alam= Strive for excellence; Jihad-e-zindagani = Life; Mardon = Men; Shamshirain = Tools)
*. Fard Qaim Rabt-e-Millat say hai, tanha kuch nahin
Moj hai darya main, aur berun-e-darya kuch nahin
(Meanings: Fard = Individual; Qaim = to survive; Rabt-e-Millat = Unity of a nation; tanha = Alone; Moj hai darya main aur berun-e-darya kuch nahin = Simile, giving example of a wave which can’t survive out of ocean. Similarly, individual is strong as long as he is part of a nation. Together we stand, divided we fall)
*. Baykhabar! Tu johar-e-aina-e-ayyam hai
Tu zamaney main Khuda ka aakhri paighaam hai
(Meanings: Baykhabar = Ignored; Johar-e-aina-e-ayyam = Jewel of the time)
*. Nahin hai na umeed Iqbal apni kasht-e-weeran say
Zara namm ho tou ye mitti bari zerkhaiz hai saaqi
(Meanings: Na umeed = Disppointed; Kasht-e-weeran = Muslim youth; namm = Soft; mitti = referring to Muslim youth; zerkhaiz = productive)
*. Jo naghma zan thay khalwat-e-oraaq main tayyur
Rukhsat huey wo terey shajr-e-saya daar say
Shaakh-e-barida say sabaq andoz ho kay tu
Na-aashna hai qaida-e-rozgaar say
Millat kay saath rabta-e-ustawar rakh
Paiwasta reh shajar say, umeed-e-bahar rakh
(Meanings: Naghma zan = Singers; Khalwat-e-oraaq= referring to glory of ancestors; tayyur = birds; Rukhsat = to leave; shajr-e-sayadaar = Shady tree; Shaakh-e-barida = Ancestors; Sabaq andoz = To Learn lesson; Qaida-e-rozgar = Formula of success; Rabta-e-Ustawar = Being continuously in touch; Paiwasta = Hopeful; Shajar = Fruit (outcomes); Umeed-e-bahar = Good time)
*. Agar manzur ho tujh ko khizan na-aashna rehna
Jahan-e-rang-o-bu say pehley qata-e-aarzu ker ley
issi main dekh, muzmir hai kamal-e-zindagi tera
Jo tuj ko zeenat-e-daman koi aina ru ker ley
(Meanings: Khizan na aashna = Not familiar with downfall; Jahan-e-rang-o-bu = World; qata-e-aarzu = To be determined to achieve something; mizmir = hidden; kamal-e-zindagi = formula of success)
*. Bandagi main ghut kay reh jaati hai ik ju-e-kam aab
Aur azadi main behr-e-baykaran hain zindagi
Kulzam-e-hasti say tu ubhra hai manind-e-hibab
Iss zayan khaaney main tera imtihan hai zindagi
(Meanings: Bandagi = Slavery; ghut = Exploitation; ju-e-kam aab = large amount of water; behr-e-baykaran = powerful strength; Kulzam-e-hasti = Humanity; Ubhra = Emerged; Manind-e-Hibab = Like a saviour; zayan khaaney = Referring to world)
*. Ye ghari mehsher ki hai, tu arsa-e-mehsher main hai
Paish ker ghaafil, amal koi agar daftar main hai
(Meanings: ghari = Time; mehsher = Day of resurrection; arsa-e-mehsher = Era of destruction; paish = to present; ghaafil = ignored; amal = something on one’s credit)
*. Rabt-o-zabt-e-millat-e-baiza hai mashriq ki nijaat
Asia waley hain iss nuktey say ab tak baykhabar
Phir syasat chor ker daakhil hisaar-e-deen main ho
Mulk-o-dolat hai faqat hifz-e-haram ka ik samar
Nas’l Muslim ki agar mazhab per muqaddam ho gayi
Urr gaya duniya say tu manind-e-khaak-e-reh guzar
Aik hon Muslim, Haram ki paasbani kay liyey
Neel kay saahil say ley ker ta-ba-khaak-e-Kashghar
Ta Khilafat ki bina duniya main ho phir ustawaar
La kaheen say dhoond ker islaaf ka qalb-o-jigar
Aey kay nashnasi khafi ra az jali, hoshyaar baash
Aey giraftar-e-Abu Bakar-o-Ali, hoshyaar baash
(Meanings: Rabt-e-zabt-e-millat-e-baiza = unity of Muslim nation; nijaat = freedom; nuktey = point; baykhabar = ignored; syasat = politics; hisaar-e-deen = Islam; hifz-e-haram = by product of religion; Nas’l = Race; muqaddam = priority; manind-e-khaak-e-reh guzar = Like dust of the road/being worthless; pasbanai = protection; Ta ba khak-e- Kashghar = Land of Kashghar; Ta Khilafat ki bina = Referring to Pious Caliphs and their system; ustawaar = reactivation; Islaaf = Ancestors; qalb-o-jigar = Strength and Faith; giraftar-e-Abu Bakar-o-Ali = Referring to those Muslims who always praise Abu Bakar and Ali for their bravery, but never follow them; hoshyar baash = Attention)
*. Kitaab-e-millat-e-baiza ki phir shiraza bandi hai
Ye shakh-e-Haashmi kerney ko hai phir barg-o-ber paida
Agar Usmanion pay toota koh-e-gham, tou kya gham hai?
Kay khoon-e-sad hazaar anjum say hoti hai seher paida
(Meanings: Kitaab-e-millat-e-baiza = Holy Quran; Shiraza bandi = Unity, integrity; Shaakh-e-Hashmi = Muslim Nation; Barg-o-ber = Roses and Jewels; paida = to produce; Koh-e-gham = Bundle of troubles; khoon-e-sad hazar anjum = Lots of sacrifices; Seher = Rising of Dawn)
*. Sabaq perh phir sadaqat ka, adalat ka, shujaat ka
*. Butan-e-rang-o-khoon ko torr ker millat main guum ho ja
Na turani rahey baaqi, na Irani, na Afghani
Mitaya qaiser-o-kisra kay istabdad ko kis nay?
Wo kya tha? zor-e-Haider, Faqr-e-Bu Zar, Siqd-e-Salmani
(Meanings: Butan-e-ran-o-khoon = those traditions or practices which are forbidden in Islam; Turani/Irani/Afghani = Regional status of Muslims; Mitaya = To eliminate; Qaiser-o-Kisra = Curel rulers who had been hard on Muslims; Istabdad = Cruelty; Zor-e-Haider = Strength of Ali (m.Allah.b.p.w.him); Faqr-e-Abu Zar = Faith of Abu Zar (m.Allah.b.p.w.him); Sidq-e-Salmani= Truth of Salman (m.Allah.b.p.w.him))
*. Jab iss angara-e-khaaki main hota hai yaqeen paida
Tou ker leta hai ye baal-o-per-e-rooh ul Amin paida
(Meanings: Angara-e-Khaaki = Human being; Yaqeen = Faith; baal-o-per = Qualities; Rooh ul Amin = Angel Gabriel (Jibraeel))
(Meanings; Narm ru qasid = Muhammad (PBUH); payam-e-zindagi = Guide to live life in correct manner; Khabar deti thin jin ko bijliyan = Those who claimed that they are gods or most poweful; baykhabar = ignored; Ahl-e-Imaan = People of Faith (Muslims))
*. Yaqeen Afrad ka sarmaya-e-tameer-e-millat hai
Yahi qu’at hai jo surat-e-ger taqdeer-e-millat hai
(Meanings:Yaqeen = Faith; Afrad = People; sarmaya-e-tameer-e-millat = Assets of a nation; Qu’at = Strength/tool; surat-e-gar taqdeer-e-millat = fortune of Muslim nation)
*. Amal say zindagi banti hai Jannat bhi, Jahannum bhi
Ye Khaaki apni fitrat main na noori hai, na naari hai
Khrosh amoz-e-bulbul ho girah ghunchey ki wa ker dey
Kay tu iss gulsitan ka wastey baad-e-behari hai
(Meanings: Amal = Deeds; Khaaki = Human bening; fitrat = Nature; noori = saint; naari = evil)
*. Hawas nay ker diya hai tukrey tukrey no-e-insan ko
Akhu’at ka bayan ho ja, mohabbat ki zuban ho ja
Ye Hindi, wo Khurasani, ye Afghani, wo Turaani
Tu, aey sharminda-e-saahil! uchal ker baykaran ho ja
Khudi main doob ja ghaafil, ye sirr-e-zindagani hai
Nikal kay halqa-e-shaam-o-seher say Jawadan ho ja
(Meanings: Hawas = Lust; tukrey = pieces; no-e-insan = Human race; Akhu’at = Integrity; bayan = Advocate; Hindi/Khursani/Afghani/Turaani = Referring to regionalism and racism; sharminda-e-saahil = Muslim; uchal ker baykaran = getting united disregard of race/colour/region; Khudi = Self respect; sirr-e-zindagani = Secret of success; Halqa-e-shaam-o-seher = thick n’ thin; Jawadan = Ever living on the basis of some unique work)
DILEMA OF MUSLIM WORLD AND ITS CAUSES
(Meanings: Shorida = Desperately in love; Khab gah-e-Nabi (PBUH) = Tomb of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH); Misr-o-Hindustan = Egypt and India; Banay-e-Millat = Unity of Muslim nation; Mita = To eliminate; Un say wasta = Concern with British; na-ashna= Not Familiar; Anjuman = System/thoughts; Nayey Zamaney = Modern Era (Connotatively, referring to secular thoughts); Purani = Old, outdated (Connotatively, a taunt on Muslims who ignored Islamic teachings and followed British traditions due to inferiority complex of being slave of British)
*. kal aik shorida khab gah-e-Nabi (PBUH) per ro ro kay keh raha tha
Kay Misr-o-Hindustan kau Muslim banay-e-Milat mita rahey hain
Ye zairan-e-hareem-e-maghrib hazar rehber banain hamarey
Hamain bhala un say wasta kya, jo tujh(PBUH) say na-ashna rahey hain
Suney ga Iqbal, koun in ko, ye anjuman hi badal gayi hai
Nayey zamaney main hum ko purani batain suna rahey hain
* Masjid tou bana di shab bhar main, Iman ki hararat walon nay
Mann apna purana papi hai, barson main Namazi ban na saka
Kya khoob ameer-e-faisal ko sanawasi nay paigham diya
Tu naam-o-nasab ka Hijazi hai, per dil ka Hijazi ban na saka
Iqbal bara updeshak hai, mann baton main mo leta hai
Guftar ka ye ghazi tou bana, kirdar ka ghazi ban na saka
(Meanings: Masjid = Mosque; Shab bhar = Within a night; Iman ki hararat walon = Men with strong Faith; Papi = Sinner; Barson = Years; Namazi = Worshiper (referring to man of strong faith here); Ameer-e-Faisal = Leader of Muslims; Sanawwasi = Air; Paigham = Message; Naam-o-nasab = Race and Culture; Hijaazi = Muslim; Updeshak = Man with speaking power; mann mo lena = To impress; Guftar = Speeches Kirdar = Character)
*. Mata-e-Aql-o-Danish lutt gayi Allah walon ki
Ye kis Kafir ada ka ghamza-e-khunrez hai Saaqi
(Meanings: Mata-e-Aql-o-Danish = Creative thoughts and wisdom; Lutt = Robbed; Allah Walon = referring to Muslims here; Kafir = non Muslim; ghamza-e-khunrez = Evil planning; Saaqi = Friend)
*. Mujhey Tehzeeb-e-Hazir nay ata ki hai wo azadi
Kay zaahir main tou azaadi hai, baatin main giraftari
Tu, aey Maula-e-Yasrab (PBUH)! aap meri chara sazi ker
Meri Daanish hai afrangi, mera Imaan hai zannari
(Meanings: Tehzeeb-e-Hazir = Present Civilisation; Azadi = Freedom; Zaahir = Physical existence or denotation; Baatin = In reality or connotation; Giraftari = Bondage; Maula-e-Yasrab (PBUH) = Prophet Muhammad (PBUH); Chara Sazi = Treatment of ailments; Daanish = Wisdom; Afrangi = Inspired by British; Zannari = Adulterate)
*. Azab-e-Daanish-e-Hazir say ba khabar hon main
Kay main iss aag main phainka gaya hon misl-e-Khalil (PBUH)
(Meanings: Azab-e-Danish-e-Hazir = So called present civilisation; ba khabar = Informed, updated; phainka = Thrown; Misl-e-Khalil (PBUH) = Like Abraham (PBUH))
*. Barh kay Khyber say hai ye marka-e-deen-o-watan
Iss zamaney main koi Haider-e-Karrar bhi hai?
Manzil-e-rehrawan dur bhi dushwaar bhi hai
Iss kaafley main koi kaafla salaar bhi hai?
(Meanings: Barh kay = More than; Khyber = A place where Ali (m.Allah.b.p.w.him) won a historical fight; Marka-e-deen-o-watan = Challenge of raising the flag of Islam; Haider-e-Karrar = Ali (m.Allah.b.p.w.him); Manzil-e-Rehrawan = Destination; Dushwar = Tough; Kaafley = Caravan; Kaafla Salaar = Leader of Caravan)
*. Ye Dour apney Baraheem ki Talash main hai
Sanam Kada hai Jahan La ILa ha IL Allah
Kiya hai tu nay Mata-e-gharoor ka soda
Fareb-e-sod-o-ziyan La ILa ha IL Allah
Agarchey Bu’t hai Jamat ki aastino main
Mujhey hai Hukm-e-Azan La ILa ha IL Allah
(Meanings: Dour = Era; Baraheem = Abraham (Peace Be Upon Him); Talash = Search; Sanam Kada = Temple where idols are placed; Mata-e-gharoor = Referring to Faith here; Fareb-e-sod-o-ziyan = An agreement of loss; Agarchey = Although; Bu’t = Idol; Jamat = Group of worshipers who say prayers in Mosque; Aastino = Referring to insight faith here; Hukam-e-Azan = Command (from Allah) to speak truth)
*. Kiya gaya hai ghulami main mubtala tujh ko
Kay tujh say ho na saki Fuqr ki nighebani
Misaal-e-maah chamakta tha jis ka daagh-e-sajood
Khareed li hai farangi nay wo Musalmani
(Meanings: Mubtala = Imposition; Fuqr = Faith; Nighebani = Protection; Misaal-e-Mah = As graceful as crescent; Daagh-e-Sajood = A graceful mark on the forehead of worshipers; Khareed = Purchased; Farangi = British)
*. Sheeraza hua millat-e-merhoom ka abtar
Ab tu hi bata tera Musalman kidhar jayey?
Iss raaz ko ab faash ker, aey Rooh-e-Muhammad (PBUH)!
Ayaat-e-ILahi ka nigheban kidher jayey?
(Meanings: Sheeraza = Organisation; Millat-e-Merhoom = Referring to downtrodden Muslim nation here; Abtar = Worst; Faash = Expose; Rooh = Soul; Ayaat-e-ILahi = One who believes and follow Quran; Nigheban = Protector)
*. wo faqa kash kay mout say derta nahin zara
Rooh-e-Muhammad (PBUH) uss kay badan say nikal dou
Fikr-e-Arab ko dey key farangi takhayyulaat
Islam ko Hijaz-o-Yaman say nikaal dou
Afghanion ki ghairat-e-deen ka hai ye ILaaj
Mullah ko un kay koh-o-daman say nikaal dou
Ahl-e-Haram say un ki riwayaat cheen lo
Aahu ko murghzar-e-hatan say nikaal dou
Iqbal kay nafs say hai laaley ki aag tez
Aisey ghazal sira ko chamman say nikaal dou
Dr. Iqbal is assuming here that Satan is addressing to his followers.
(Meanings: Faqa kash = Poor man but of strong Faith; derta = Scared of; Badan = Body; Fikr = Thoughts; Takhayyulat= Concepts; Ghairat-e-deen = Strong Faith; ILaaj = Cure; Mullah = Referring to strong faith Muslim here; Koh-o-daman = Country (Afghanistan here); Ahl-e-Haram = Muslims; Riwayaat = Traditions; Aahu = Deer; Murghzar-e-Hatan= Land of Faith and peace; Nafs = Thoughts; Laley = Garden; Ghazal Sira = Reformer here)
*. Kabhi aey haqeeqat-e-muntazir, nazar aa libas-e-majaz main
kay hazar sajdey tarap rahey hain, meri jabeen-e-nyaz main
Jo main sir basajda hua kabhi, tou zameen say aney lagi sada
Tera dil tou hai sanam aashna, tujhey kya miley ga namaz main
(Meanings: Haqeeqat-e-Muntazir = Referring to God Almighty here; Libas-e-Majaz = Being Visible; Sajdey = To prostrate; Jabeen-e-nayaz= Forehead; sir basajda = ToProstate; Sada = Voice; Sanam Aashna = Beloved of idols)
*. Tamaddun, tasawwuf, shariat, kalaam
Butaan-e-Ajam kay pujari tamam
Haqeeqat khurafaat main kho gayi
Ye ummat riwayaat main kho gayi
(Meanings: Tamaddun = Traditions; Tasawwuf = Mysticism; Shariat = Islamic Law (referring to fake Islamic law created by so called scholars in self interest, in name of Islam); Kalam = To praise (referring to hypocrisy of such Muslims, whose worship is to impress people instead of pleasing God. Those for whom, last three verses of Surah Maa’on in Noble Quran have been revealed); Butaan-e-Ajam = gods of other religions; Pujari = Worshipers; Haqeeqat = Truth (referring to original teachings of Islam); Khurafaat = Senseless things; Ummat = (Muslim) Nation; Riwayaat = Traditions)
*. Haath bayzor hain, ILhaad say dil khugar hain
Ummati bais-e-ruswai-e-paighambar (PBUH) hain
Bu’t shikan uth gayye, baqi jo rahey Bu’t ger hain
Tha Baraheem Pidr, aur ye Pisr-e-Aazr hain
Koi qabil ho tou HUM shan-e-kai detey hain
Dhoondney waley ko duniya bhi nayi detey hain
(This verse is taken from poem “Jawab-e-Shikwa” and Dr. Iqbal is assuming that Allah Himself is addressing to Muslims)
(Meanings: Bayzor = Weak; ILhaad = Apostasy; Khugar = Convinced; Ummati = Muslims; Bais-e-ruswai-e-paighambar (PBUH) = Matter of depression for Prophet (PBUH); Bu’t Shikan = True and determined Muslims; Bu’t ger = Lovers of idols; pisr-e-aazar = Followers of Aazar, an idol maker; Qabil = Competant; Shan-e-Kai = Success; Dhoondney = Search)
*. Kis qadar tum pay garan subha ki baydari hai
Hum say kab pyar hai, haan neend tumhain pyari hai
Taba-e-azad per qaid-e-ramzan bhaari hai
Tumhi keh dou, yahi aain-e-wafadari hai?
Qaum Mazhab say hai, Mazhab jo nahin tum bhi nahin
Jazb-e-baham jo nahin, mehfil-e-anjum bhi nahin
(Meanings: Qadar = Extent; Garan = Tough; Subha ki baydari = Referring to get up for morning prayers; Hum = Referring to God here as Dr. Iqbal is assuming that God is addressing Muslims; Neend = Referring to preferring other things over prayers by Muslims; Taba-e-Azad = Written in taunting way, referring to careless nature of Muslims; Qaid-e-Ramzan = Taunting again, referring to Muslims who take holy month of Ramadan as a burden or liability to be released unwillingly; Ain-e-wafadari = Rule of submission and sincerity; Mazhab = Religion; Jazb-e-baham = Joint efforts; Mehfil-e-Anjum = Success and fruitful results)
*. Jin ko aata nahin duniya main kli fun, tum ho
Nahin jis qaum ko parwa-e-nash-e-mann, tum ho
Bijliyan jis main hon aasuda wo khurmen, tum ho
Baich khaatey hain jo Islaaf kay madfan, tum ho
Thay tou A’ba wo tumharey hi magar tum kya ho?
Haath per haath dharey muntazir-e-farda ho?
(Meanings: Funn = Skill; Parwa-e-nash-e-mann = Strive for excellence and prosperity; Bijliyan = Referring to creative and constructive ideas; Islaaf = Forefather; Madfan = Coffins; A’ba = Ancestors; Muntazir-e-Farda = Waiting for some help)
*. Manfia’t aik hai iss qaum ki nuqsaan bhi aik
Aik hi sab ka Nabi (PBUH), Deen bhi, Imaan bhi aik
Harm-e-Pak bhi, Allah bhi, Quran bhi aik
Kuch bari baat thi hotey jo Musalmaan bhi aik?
Firqa bandi hai kahin, aur kahin zaatain hain
Kya zamaaney main pinapnay ki yahi batain hain?
(Meanings: Manfia’t = Profit; Nuqsaan = Loss; Harm-e-Pak = Referring to Khana-e-Kaba; Firqa bandi = Sectarian culture; Zaatain = Caste System; Pinapney = To progress)
*. Koun hai tarak-e-Aain-e-Rasool-e-Mukhtar (PBUH)?
Maslehet waqt ki hai kis kay amal ka mayaar?
Kis ki aankhon main samaya hai sha’ar-e-aghyaar
Ho gayi kis ki nigah tarz-e-salaf say bayzaar
Qalb main soz nahin, rooh main ihsaas nahin
Kuch bhi paighan-e-Muhammad (PBUH) ka tumhain pass nahin
(Meanings: Tarak-e-Aain-e-Rasool-e-Mukhtar (PBUH) = Those who have rejected/ignored teachings of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH); Maslehet = Compromise; Sha’ar-e-aghyaar = Impressed by non Muslims; Nigah = Vision; Tarz-e-Salaf = Practices of Ancestors; bayzaar = tired of/ fed up; Qalb = Heart; Soz = sense of responsibility; Rooh = Soul; Ihsaas = sensibility; Paigham-e-Muhammad (PBUH) = Message of Muhammad (PBUH); pass = care)
*. Shor hai ho gayey duniya say Musalman nabood
Hum yeh kehtey hain kay thay bhi kahin Muslim mojud?
(Meanings: Zoq-e-may-e-mast-e-tan aasani = Lazy/ dull/ leisure minded; Andaz-e-Musalmani = Ways of Muslims; HaideriFuqr = Spiritual values of Ali (m.Allah.b.p.w.him); Dolat-e-Usmani = Wealth of Usman (m.Allah.b.p.w.him); Islaaf = Ancestors; Nisbat-e-rohani = Spirutual inheritance; Wo = Referring to companions of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH); Mo’aziz = Respected; Khawar = Insulted; Tarak-e-Quran = Those who rejected/ignored Quran)
Inspite of Allama Iqbal being the most influential Muslim scholar of the 20th century throughout the Muslim World, his true message and ideas have never before been brought out as strongly and clearly as Zaid Hamid has.
BT-72 Iqbal The Mysterious 1: Google
BT-74 Iqbal the Mysterious 2: YouTube-1
BT-75 Iqbal The Mysterious 3: YouTube-1
BT-76 Iqbal The Mysterious 4: YouTube-1
BT-77 Iqbal The Mysterious 5: BlipTV-2
BT-91 Iqbal The Mysterious 5: BlipTV-2
BT-93 Iqbal The Mysterious 6: BlipTV-2
BT-94 Iqbal The Mysterious 7: BlipTV-2
BT-106 Iqbal The Mysterious 8: BlipTV-2
BT-107 Iqbal The Mysterious 9: BlipTV-2
BT-109 Iqbal The Mysterious 10: BlipTV-2
BT-112 Iqbal The Mysterious 11:
BT-113 Iqbal The Mysterious 12: YouTube-1YouTube-2
BT-114 Iqbal The Mysterious 13: YouTube-1
BT-115 Iqbal The Mysterious 14: YouTube-1
BT-117 Iqbal The Mysterious (Future) 15: YouTube-1
BT-119 Iqbal The Mysterious (Last) 16: YouTube-1
The Indus Valley Civilization now known as Paksitan
Pakistan existed 5000 years ago as the IVC
The Pakistan Ideology
by
Moin-Ansari
Original March 16th, 1996 and Updated February 7th, 2009
| NEW YORK | RUPEE NEWS | March 16th, 1996 | Moin Ansari |
Lest we forget the ideology of the Hinduvata Mahasab, let us quote it right here. Lest some dismiss it as a relic of the past, let us remind them that the BJP was in power in in Delhi and holds a major vote in the Lok and Rajha Saba. For those who may say that this quote is a historical anomoly belonging to the hsitory books, let us remind them that Mr. Narendar Modi, Mr. Adhvani and Mr. Bal Thackery have cloned themselves by the millions and this very same thinking was used to burn, rape and massacre more than 2000 Muslims in Gujarat just a few months ago.
“I declare that the future of the Hindu race, of Hindustan and of the Punjab, rests on these four pillars: (1) Hindu Sangathan, (2) Hindu Raj, (3) Shuddhi of Moslems, and (4) Conquest and Shuddhi of Afghanistan and the Frontiers. So long as the Hindu nation does not accomplish these four things, the safely of our children and great-grandchildren will be ever in danger, and the safety of the Hindu race will be impossible. The Hindu race has but one history, and its institutions are homogeneous. But the Musalmans and Christians are far removed from the confines of Hindustan, for their religions are alien and they love Persian, Arab and European institutions. Thus, just as one removes foreign matter from the eye, Shuddhi must be made of these two religions. Afghanistan and the hilly regions of the frontier were formerly part of India, but are at present under the domination of Islam. . . .Just as there is Hindu religion in Nepal, so there must be Hindu institutions in Afghanistan and the frontier territory; otherwise it is useless to win Swaraj. For mountain tribes are always warlike and hungry. If they become our enemies, the age of Nadirshah and Zamanshah will begin anew. At present English officers are protecting the frontiers; but it cannot always be. . . .If Hindus want to protect themselves, they must conquer Afghanistan and the frontiers and convert all the mountain tribes.” Pratap of Lahore, Lala Hardayal in 1925. Quoted by Dr. Ambedkar in his book “Pakistan”
When there are problems in Pakistan many look at the government and think of the present administration in power as the state. While the head of every government boldly declares “Le etat c’est moi” (I am the state), all of us who are disenfranchised, suppressed, and repressed need to take a cold hard look at the government. We should understand the difference between he government and the state. The government could be evil but the state of Pakistan does not belong to the government, the state of Pakistan belongs to the people of Pakistan, it belongs to us. 5561st re-birthday! Congratualations to Indus Pakistanis
Neither the strife in FATA, nor the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, nor the externally sponsored hooliganism and killings in Swat that have become the hallmark of today’s news, nor the band of marauders and mercenaries that infiltrate our borders to create malaise and mayhem in our land, can detract us from remembering the anniversary of the day that we decided to create a land for the Muslims of the subcontinent—a land we later named Pakistan. Pakistan: Another Indian prophecy of doom. Here we go again. The first one came in 1947.
THE PAKISTANI RESILIENCE IN THE FACE OF THREATS: Mountbatten, Nehru, Indira, Kruschev, Johnson, Carter, Kissinger (Nixon), Gobachov, Clinton, Armitage (Bush), Karzia (Bush and Vajpayee/Sing) have all threatened Pakistan: The Pakistanis are used to it…so what else is new?!! Pakistan’s Nuclear Program should be seen in the backdrop of these threats.The capacity of Pakistan to sustain some fifteen major disarticulations in polity, power, and structure and still preserve a national identity is a phenomenon one is tempted to explain by recourse to the supernatural.
Pakistan which has been pummelled by external events (three wars with India, secession of Bangladesh, 3.5 million Afghan refugees) and disrupted by internal fissures (4 periods of martial law totalling 27 years and ethnic violence in Sindh) to a degree which no other state established since 1945 has suffered. In this respect it stands as an exemplar of a nation whose adversities “common sense” might suggest make its viability impossible.
Yet its continued existence defies the reality induced by such speculation. The enormity and persistence of these difficulties and the resilience of the nation in absorbing and somehow surviving them must be regarded with awe if not admiration.” RALPH BRAIBANTI
This salute is dedicated to the 1200 men and women who died defending our borders as well as the thousands who were innocent victims of aggression on our shores. In-spite of the murders, and in-spite of the bombs, life in Pakistan goes on, and the Crescent and the Star flutters high on our sky scrapers and pulsates proud in our hearts. Let this anniversary of our Lahore resolution be a lesson to our enemies, that we remember our dedication to our cause, and promise to keep the dream of our fathers of our nation, Jinnah, Liaqat-Ali Khan and Iqbal alive.
Trail of freedom from the bowels of hell in Bharat to freedom in Pakistan
We remember the 1 million lives lost in creating a country, and also rededicate ourselves to the fact that “Pakistan manzil nahin, Nishan e Manzil hai”. Thatmanzil was defined by Iqbal, Liaqat, Jinnah and many others who carry the banner in the land of the Crescent and Star. Despite some impediments we have not lost track of the “manzil“. Pakistan as it existed 5000 years ago
‘India is no more a country than the Equator’.Winston Churchill
The British Indian Empire included Iraq, Aden, Somalia, Burma, and more than 500 states of the Subcontinent
The British Empire spanning continents
The Muslim majority areas of the Subcontinent should have been part of Pakistan. Many Muslims wanted to stay and fight in the “Darul Harb” ’till it was changed to “Darul islam“. (notice islam with lower case “i” which depicts islam=peace). The Quaid’s vision was to separate based on demographics.
Patel and others cheated us out of a real separation.
The more then 500 independent princely states of the Subcontinent
The State of Hyderabad wanted to stay independent after 1948 but was run over by Patel
The Princely state of Bombay Presidency
The Princely state of Baroda
Before separation
After separation
After the Muslims won the right for separate electorates, Jinnah supported the Dalits to get the same right. This was wholeheartedly opposed by Mr. Mohandas Gandhi. In the Round Table Conferences in 1930-32, the concept of separate electorates for the Untouchables and Dalits was raised by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, as a way to ensure sufficient representation for the minority Dalits, in government.
… Gandhi was a so-called “high caste”. High castes represent at small minority in India, some 10-15 percent of the population, yet dominate Indian society in much the same way whites ruled South Africa during the official period of Apartheid. Dalits often use the phrase Apartheid in India when speaking about their problems.
.. Gandhi’s main critic and political opponent, Dr. Ambedkar, for whom our journal is named and the first Dalit in history to receive an education ..
The All India Muslim League session of 1936
1938 RESOLUTION ASKED FOR SEPARATION:Even earlier in 1938 Sir Abdullah Haroon moved a resolution for establishing independent Muslim states in the north-west and eastern zones. The word states continued to be used in subsequent sessions of the All India Muslim League till about 1943. Originally the two zones were meant to be autonomous and sovereign and it was only when the British and the Hindus insisted that Punjab and Bengal were to be partitioned that Pakistan began to be talked about as one state.
THE PAKISTAN RESOLUTION OF 1940: The Lahore Resolution (later known as the Pakistan Resolution) The Lahore resolution moved by Fazlul Haq at the 27th Session of the All India Muslim League, at Lahore on March 23, 1940 stated:
“that geographically contagious units are demarcated into regions which should be so constituted, with such territorial adjustments as may be necessary, that the areas in which the Muslims are in a majority, as in the north-west and eastern zones of India, should be grouped to constitute independent states in which the constituent units shall be autonomous and sovereign.”
What is the Two Nation Theory exactly? The moniker “‘two’ ‘nation’ ‘theory’” is a misnomer. The theory of nationalities states that “India does not have a homogeneous population”. There are many racial, ethnic and linguistic groups in India. India is not a national state, India is not a country, but a sub-continent composed of “nationalities”. The two nation theory clearly states that that there are several nationalities in the subcontinent, and the Hindus and the Muslims are the largest of the two nations. Hindus and Muslims are different therefore Muslim majority areas must exist separately. Chaudry Rehmat Ali’s “Pakistan proposal asked for SEVERAL MUSLIM STATES in the subcontinent.”
In this document a map of India has also been published showing India split into different states, named as Pakistan, Guruistan, Usmanistan, Bangsamispan, Hindoostan comprising Rajistan, Kathiwar, Maharashtra, Rajistan and Dravidia. This pamphlet was reproduced in 1934 (Ref: The Great Divide by H. V. Hodson page 81). Karakal Pakistan’ existed as autonomous region of USSR.
He claimed that the destiny of whole Millat in the continent of “Dinia” (changed name of India) and its dependencies lies in the integration of Muslims into 10 countries: Pakistan, Bangistan, Usmanistan, Siddiqistan, Faruqistan, Haideristan, Muistan, Maplistan, Saristan, Nasarastan and than to be coordinated into Pak. Common Wealth of Nations.
Hanoodia:243 principalities or Rajwaras
Hindoostan: Rajistan, Kathiwar, Mahrashtra, Rajistan and Dravidia
Saristan
Nasarastan
Haideristan
Siddiqistan
“Pakistan” (P=Punjab, A=Afghania, K=Kashmir, I=Islam, TAN=Baluchistan) in the Northwest including Kashmir, Delhi and Agra: “
Bangistan” in Bengal:
“Osmanistan” in Hyderabad; “Siddiquistan” in Bundelhand and Malwa; “
Faruqistan” in Bihar and Orissa: “
Haideristan” in UP: “
Muinistan” in Rajasthan: “
Maplistan” in Kerala:
“Safiistan” in “Western Ceylon” and “Nasaristan” in “Eastern Ceylon”, etc.
The map was published by Rahmat Ali in 1934 and came to be widely circulated in his pamphlet called “Now or Never” among the Muslims of the Subcontinent.
Rahmat Ali was disgusted at the bias of the British and referred the “British-Banya alliance” presumably in He even declined to refer to an “India” as having ever existed at all and instead called the subcontinent “Dinia”, and the oceans and the seas around India as the “Pakian Sea”, the “Osmanian Sea” etc. He urged the Dalits, Sikhs, Buddhists to rise up against the Hindus. In in “Sikhistan” he asked them to be independent. He urged all of the supressed peoples to rise up against supression.
This is what we asked for.
We were cheated out of this.
ANALYSIS OF THE TWO NATION THEORY:
The two nation theory enunciates that the subcontinent is made of several nationalities, the Hindus and the Muslims being the largest of the two. India is as big as Western Europe and contains many many racial, religious, linguistic, and ethnic groups. The Hindus and the Muslims are two separate nations, in terms of diet, attitude, social behavior, economic tendencies, social interaction, behaviors, and attitude.
According to many Pakistanis “The two nation theory did not solve all the problems of the subcontinent. However it did save 200 million Muslims (those emancipated in Pakistan and Bangladesh) from social economic and political servitude. The servitude is proven by the decadent condition of Indian Muslims in a “secular” Indian state. Perhaps it sacrifices 150 million Indian Muslims. But the alternative was 450 million Muslims in servitude.” “Secularism” in “India” means “Hinduism Light.“
Nationhood is defined as the tendency of a nation to exist. No two nations have the same reason to exist. USA and Canada exist separately, though you may think that both nations have English speaking population, with similar accents, similar religions, similar culture, similar economic structures, and similar racial and ethnic backgrounds. Do you hear America question the validity of Canada to exist. I believe that the USA has the power to take over Canada, if it really wanted to. BUT the USA recognizes the right of the Canadians to exist separately.
THE TWO NATION THEORY & THREE STATES: The Two Nation theory cannot be debunked because there are more then one Muslim country in the subcontinent. The Hindu nation lives in more than one country (India, Nepal, Sikkim, Bhutan, Burma, Sri Lanka, Laos, Cambodia, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Bangladesh). The Chinese nation lives in several states (Taiwan, China, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia). Similarly the Muslim nation (transcending all racial, ethnic, caste and linguistic boundaries) can live in several states. There are several Arab Muslim countries too. The country of Pakistan as a unified Muslim country in the subcontinent was actually asked for the Bengali nationalists. Jinnah acquiesced.
The “Nationalistic” Indian attitude towards the TNT: Many modern Indians have a what Pakistanis consider a “strange” attitude. Pakistan should not exist, because it would be better for Indian Muslims, better for Indian Hindus, better for Pakistanis. Pakistanis ask “How do they know it would be better for us?” And who are they to judge our feelings, and tell us what is better for our nation?” If a nation is defined “as a tendency of a people to seek a country”then the Muslims of the Subcontinent are a nation. They point out to one insignificant point or the other in Pakistan to devalue the “raisan d’etre” of Pakistani nationhood. This attitude spell perpetual warfare.
PAKISTANI NATIONHOOD: Pakistanis justify the existence of the country by explaining that “India was never ONE NATION. India is as big as Western Europe and has more nationalities than Europe. The subcontinent has always been a conglomeration of states and nationalities. If one looks at the “Indian” map during the Mughal era, or during Vikramadatya’s era, one will see dozens, sometimes hundreds of STATES. Pakistanis believe that “Akhand Bharat” was a figment of the imagination of Gandhi and the Jan Sangh. Just because the British called it India, does not mean that it was one nation ever or will be one nation ever.”
Plutarch expressed this sentiment well some centuries ago: “A conqueror is always a lover of peace. He would like to make his entry into your cities unopposed.” Does India talk peace in the Plutarchian sense?
SUMMARY AND ABSTRACT ON SOUTH ASIAN SCHISMS
This article presents the arguments of political stratification and nation forming that were in the air in the Forties. The arguments against the Subcontinental nationhood are discussed at length. The arguments for a Pakistani nation are analyzed in depth. Arguments from both sides are presented and refuted.
The history of the creation of India and Pakistan is not always in teleological progression. We have lost a lot of history by tracing our history by traveling through chronological diaries and self aggrandizing biographies. Neither Pakistani nor Indian history books have done an adequate job of tracing our roots. Neither explain “partition” properly.
The Pakistani text books ignore Hindu contributions to our common struggle against colonialism, and seem ashamed of the common lineage with Hindus—(Indus Valley, Buddhism), Pakistani historical narratives underplay the role of the nationalist Indian Muslim leadership, Jauhar, Azad and Suhrawardi, and over emphasize the importance of the RSS and Jan Sangh. Pakistani textbooks ignore the Sufi contributions to our struggle of independence and restrict discussion of Sufiism to Shah Waliullah and a few others.
The Indian textbooks fail to see the Pakistan movement as a provincial and minority rebellion against the Nehruite Marxist-Leninist Federalism that was the hall mark of the INC. The Indian textbooks fail to mention the three wings of Congress, the Nehruite secular wing led by Nehru, the fundamentalist and communal wing led by Rai, the religious wing led by Gandhi, and the extreme nationalist wing led by Patel. The Bharat text books fail to recognize that fact that Gandhi was and was seen as a religious leader by the minorities and by a large section of the Hindu populace. The Indian text books over glorify many Hindu periods, fail to mention the Hindu Buddhist wars, diminish Brahamanism and Brahamanic cruelties towards non-Brahmans, relegate the Mughal era to the greatness of Akbar, ignore the Hindu communal organizations, demonize Muslim leaders who differed with Gandhi, brand secular and moderate Muslim leadership of the Muslim League as communal leaders, overlook the frailties of the INC leadership that led to the Hindu-Muslim schism, and fail to recognize the radical non-secular part of the Congress that scared the minorities.
The Indian textbooks neglect to mention the accomplishments of the Muslim League Muslim leadership that tried to safeguard the interests of the Indian Muslim minorities by fighting for separate electorates for the Muslims, and tried to guarantee the rights of the minorities through the Cabinet Mission Plan and by demanding one third of the representation in parliament. This ingenious plan would have guaranteed a fair and equitable settlement. However vested interests in the INC would not allow this.
The article has some in-bred biases towards the Pakistani point of view. No apologies are given for this slant. The purpose of the article is not convince people, simply to present facts and analysis.
THE FORTIES: THE THEORIES IN AIR
Freedom is in the air. The Union Jack is to come down. How do wedeal with independence? Are we mature enough to behave as civilized nations? The years preceding our independence was an intense time. The Freedom Movement created many leaders and many movements. Neither the Muslims nor the Hindus nor the Sikhs were monolithic groups. Each political group had many leaders. Many times the leadership seemed to head in different directions. The Harrow-Eaton Oxbridge led INC under the leadership of Motilal Nehru was a very different Congress. The INC led by his son Jawaharlal Nehru was a very different INC.
The INC had several factions that split and made up. Similarly the Muslim Movement had factions and grouping in it. Disgruntled elements in each of the major parties went and formed their own political parties and contested the elections. Each group had sub-groupings and subdivisions. There were more than 550 states in the Subcontinent. The Forties gave us the opportunity to forge a country in the Subcontinent or create many nations. As a people we failed to remain at peace. As countries we failed to keep the peace. As nations we failed to usher in an era of prosperity into the Subcontinent. Today let history teach us some lessons.
Most readers are familiar withGandhi’s great hunger strike against the so called Poona Pact in 1933. The matter which Gandhi was protesting, nearly unto death at that, was the inclusion in the draft Indian Constitution, proposed by the British, that reserved the right of Dalits to elect their own leaders. Dr. Ambedkar, with his degree in law from Cambridge, had been chosen by the British to write the new constitution for India. Having spent his life overcoming caste-based discrimination, Dr. Ambedkar had come to the conclusion that the only way Dalits could improve their lives is if they had the exclusive right to vote for their leaders, that a portion or reserved section of all elected positions were only for Dalits and only Dalitscould vote for these reserved positions.
Separate electorate was vehemently opposed by Mahatma Gandhi on the grounds that the move would disintegrate Hindu society. If the Dalits had gotten a separate electorate, this would have ensured certain constituencies which would have been reserved for them. Only the Dalits would have been able to vote for the candidates contesting those seats. This would have given them real leaders and real participation in the elections.
Gandhi was determined to prevent this and went on hunger strike to change this article in the draft constitution. After many communal riots, where tens of thousands of Dalitswere slaughtered, and with a leap in such violence predicted if Gandhi died, Dr. Ambedkaragreed, withGandhi on his death bed, to give up the Dalits right to exclusively elect their own leaders and Gandhi ended his hunger strike.
Later, on his own death bed, Dr. Ambedkar would say this was the biggest mistake in his life, that if he had to do it all over again, he would refuse to give up Dalitonly representation, even if it meant Gandhi’s death.
ONT VS. TNT:
The Two Nation Theory is in direct contradiction of the One Nation Theory. There were proponents of the One Nation Theory in the Indian National Congress and many Muslims believed in the One Nation Theory. Similarly there were many Congressional Leaders that believed in the Two Nation Theory. There were many variations of the TNT and there were many variations of the ONT . On the one hand the TNT espoused many countries in the Subcontinent, on the other is espoused two countries.
Rama Rajha vs Darul Islam: The ONT had many variations too. There were fundamentalist minority of Muslims who also supported the ONT and had declared India as “Darul Harb” (Area of war) with a view to convert it to “Darul Islam” (Area of peace). The religious right espoused a religious Brahman theocracy based on the dharma. “Ram Rajha” were proposed with forced eviction and/or conversion of all Non-Hindus by some of the fundamentalist parties on the right.
United States of India vs. Mahabharta vs India and Pakistan There were the secular versions of the ONT and there were many that propagated a United States of India. The secular and moderate wings of the Congress and the Muslims won the day, and the fundamentalist on both sides lost the elections.
POST TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER: India had 400 million people. The Muslims were a minority, and because of colonialism had lost the political power in the Subcontinent. The British had taken actions to snatch the control from the Muslims at all echelons of power. The Muslims were demoralized, penury-stricken and were unable to compete with the the more affluent and more educated Hindus. Separate electorates allowed them to elect their own representatives, but the fear of “majoratarianism” scared the minority. Indian “democracy” still does not have any safeguards to prevent “majoratarianism” from dictating to the minority. Requests for one third seats in parliament were not acceptable to the Indian National Congress, and though on many occasions agreements were reached, pressures within the Congress did not allow the agreements to materialize.
The Cabinet Mission Planwas the closest the INC came to an agreement with the Muslim League. It was under these circumstances that they marched for freedom. The following narrative helps us remember the historical chronology and the ideological battles that were waged then and are being waged now over the internet.
The supporters of the TNT won the elections and won the arguments, and the believers of the ONT lost the elections. The INC and the Jamat e Islami were rejected by the Muslims. The TNT became fact and the ONT remains a fascination by many. These pages will distinguish the origins of the ONT and the TNT.
POST INDEPENDENCE PRESSURES VALIDATE THE TNT: Post-independence chronologies have shown us that religious pressures in both India and Pakistan have forced the moderate parties to take religious decisions. Today in India moderate Pakistani parties like the Muslims League characterized as communal. Today in Pakistan and moderate parties like the Congress are characterized as religious parties.
THE 360 VIEW: STATES FORMED ON THE BASIS OF RELIGION Pakistan of course is not the only sate formed on the basis of religion.
Throughout history there have been states formed on the basis of religion. The Holy Roman Empire, The Turkish Ottoman Empire, Lebanon, Israel, the Federated/ Confederated Republic of Cypriot Turks, and more recently Bosnia have all been formed on the basis of religion. Many of these states survived for centuries and indeed thrived. The basis of many “states” in the Indian Republic is indeed based on religion (though this is usually disguised). Haryana is one prime example of a state that was separated from the Punjab on the basis of religion. Sindh, was divided on the basis of religion with the cognizance and approval of the Indian National Congress.
BANGLADESH AS THIRD COUNTRY IN THE TWO NATIONS The creation of Bangladesh is the fulfilled prophecy of the Lahore Resolution. The TNT is not affected by the creation of Bangladesh. Pakistanis claim that “The Two Nation theory cannot be debunked because there are more then one Muslim country in the subcontinent.” The Hindu nation lives in more than one country (India, Nepal, Sikkim, Bhutan, Burma, Sri Lanka, Laos, Cambodia, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Bangladesh). The Chinese nation lives in several states (Taiwan, China, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia). Similarly the Muslim nation (transcending all racial, ethnic, caste and linguistic boundaries) can live in several states. There are several Arab Muslim countries too.
The country of Pakistan as a unified Muslim country in the subcontinent was actually asked for the Bengali nationalists. Jinnah acquiesced Bangladesh faces the same religious pressures as Pakistan with regard to religion. The separation from Pakistan was cognizance of a geo-political reality and the development of minority and regional rights, the same rights that Jinnah tired to guarantee in his famous Fourteen Points. The TNT and Jinnah sought a weak center and strong provincial rights. Neither India which bases it provinces and states on linguistics AND RELIGION, nor Pakistan, nor Bangladesh nor Sri Lanka have been able to resolve the question of religious and ethnic minorities. The creation of Banglasdesh, the de facto division of Sri Lanka and the “special status” accorded to Kashmiris within India are indeed recognition of the TNT in its various forms. Jamaat wants BD to be declared an Islamic state :
01 May 1997, Thursday, 23, Zilhaj 141720 DHAKA, April 30: Bangladesh’s Jamaat-i-Islam party on Wednesday renewed its demand for the country to be declared an Islamic state.20 “The constitution must recognize the sovereignty of God through declaring the country an Islamic Republic,” Jamaat’s secretary general Matiur Rahman Nizami told reporters .20 Nizami said the 10-month-old government of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wajed had failed to play a “positive role” in political and socio-economic areas and said law and order had severely deteriorated over the past few months.20 “We think everybody is worried at the present situation of the country,”he said and announced a two-month campaign beginning on Thursday to drum up support for Jamaat’s demands for an Islamic state. Jamaat backed Awami League during its campaign against the BNP government of former prime minister Khaleda Zia, who resigned in May last year.97AFP20
GANDHI ON CREATION OF PAKISTAN
In an interesting book called “Birds of a feather flock together” by Anwar Shaikh the author says the following:
“The fact that the Indians did not have to fight the British for freedom, absolves them of the usually leveled charge of divide and rule. The British ruled several communities and they were politically and morally obliged to give a fair healing to all of them. It was the attitudes of mutual hatred, which contributed to the communal divisions, but came to be ascribed to the British. This is the truth that Gandhi described when he said:
….but if both of us – Hindus and Muslims – cannot agree on anything else the Viceroy is left with no choice .
It was not the British, who divided India: it is the Congress and the League that had agreed to partition as the solution and Mountbatten was not to blame”.Gandhi assured .
THE ONT PROPONENTS: THE NATIONALISTIC INDIAN ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE TNT: Many modern Indians have a what Pakistanis consider a “strange” attitude. Pakistan should not exist, because it would be better for Indian Muslims, better for Indian Hindus, better for Pakistanis. Pakistanis retort 93How do they know it would be better for us? And who are they to judge our feelings, and tell us what is better for our nation? If a nation is defined as a tendency of a people to seek a country then the Muslims of the Subcontinent are a nation. Pakistanis justify the existence of the country by explaining that 93India was never ONE NATION. India is as big as Western Europe and has more nationalities than Europe. The subcontinent has always been a conglomeration of states and nationalities. If one looks at the ‘Indian’ map during the Mughal era, or during Vikramadatya’s era, one will see dozens, sometimes hundreds of STATES. Pakistanis believe that “Akhand Bharat” was a figment of the imagination of Gandhi and the Jan Sangh. Just because the British called it India, does not mean that it was one nation ever or will be one nation ever.
“THE PAKISTAN IDEOLOGY” EXPLAINS “WHY PAKISTAN?: For those who TRULY want to understand Pakistanis, let us go over the excerpts from: Ideology of Pakistan by Prof. Saeeduddin Ahmad Dar
The Muslims of South Asia are a nation in the modern sense of the word; The basis of their nationhood is neither territorial, nor racial, nor linguistic nor ethnic; They are a nation because they profess the same faith Islam; They are entitled to self-determination. The areas where they (Muslims) are in dominant majority should be constituted into sovereign states/state; Wherein they should be enabled to order their lives in individual and collective spheres in accord with the teachings and requirements of Islam asset out in Holy Quran and Sunna; and The state should endeavour to strengthen the bonds of unity among Muslim countries. The Ideology of Pakistan stems from the instinct of the Muslim Community of South Asia to maintain its individuality by resisting all attempts to absorb it by the Hindu society. They believe that Islam is incompatible with Hinduism. Historical experience has shown that Islam and Hinduism have two different social orders and given birth to two distinct cultures and that there is no meeting point between the two.
TNT: WHY PAKISTAN
Let us give you a skeleton argument of WHY Pakistan was needed. The creation of Pakistan can be explained in the following sentences:
a) The Lahore Resolution proposed 2 Muslim states in the subcontinent and India in the middle in accordance with the Two Nation Theory. Pakistanis believe that TNT is alive, EVEN After 1971 or else BD would have folded into India. Many nations live in more than ONE country. The Arabs (Libya and Egypt etc.) live in more than one country. The Hindu nation lives in more than one country (Nepal, Bhutan) etc., etc. Etc. The creation of Bangladesh does not negate the Nationalities Theory of the Subcontinent.
b) In 1947 Hindus in India controlled almost all parts of life in the Subcontinent. To emancipate the Muslims a SEPARATE quarantine (Green house where the economically depressed Muslims could be nurtured) area had to be created to allow MORE opportunity to the Muslims.
c)The Muslim League wanted a Muslim majority land because they feared that the Hindus would totally subjugate their Islamic entity. Most Pakistanis feel that this has actually happened to the 100 million Muslims who were left in India today.
d) The Muslim League did not want/plan a population transfer. However this did happen. Both sides blame each other. The population transfer took place.
e) If the population transfer had not taken place (and Pakistan still had a 30% Hindu population), would Muslims have achieved something in Pakistan? Would Muslims have gotten a free ride in business with Hindus dominating the businesses in Pakistan? The answer to these questions are not simple. If the Hindu majority towns in Pakistani Sind are any indication, there would have been no problem.
f) In 1945 the Congress accepted the Cabinet Mission Plan. So did the Muslim League. Then the Congress led by Jawaharlal Nehru made a volte face and rejected it. So then did the Muslim League. It was clear that Nehru did not want to risk the chance of the leadership of India going out of his hands. Nehru was as much responsible for Pakistan as Jinnah. If Pakistan had been created a multi-cultural multi-communal entity, with the entire Punjab and the entire Bengal (as envisaged by Quaid-e-Azam) then we would have a very very different Subcontinent. We got what Quad-e-Azam called a 93moth-eaten-Pakistan94 (it was this moth-eaten Pakistan or nothing). It was very difficult for this moth eaten Pakistan to survive (without any infra-structure, industries etc.). If a multi-cultural, multi-communal Pakistan had been allowed to evolve perhaps we would NOT have had three wars!
THE ORIGINS OF THE TWO NATION THEORY AND THE TRANSITION TO THE NATIONALITIES FACT What started as the Nationalities theory was labeled “The two nation theory” and ended up as the SEVERAL NATIONALITIES FACT. The TNT has been around for centuries. Quaid-e-Azam,Mohammad Ali Jinnah on one occasion said that the struggle for Pakistan started when the first Muslim set foot on the shores of Sindh. This is what Al Beruni in his treatise Kitab-Ul-Hind about the differences he observed between the two communities: “The Hindus entirely differ from the Muslims in every respect. One might think that they had intentionally changed them into the opposite, for our customs do not resemble theirs”.
Al Beruni enumerates the following reasons for the complete and entire isolation of the Muslims as a community from the Hindus: “All their (Hindu) fanaticism is directed against those who do not belong to them. They (Hindus) call them (Muslims and others) impure, and forbid having any connection with them, be it inter-marriage, or by any other kind of relationship, or by sitting, eating, and drinking with them, because thereby they think why would be polluted”. In early eleventh century Al-Biruni observed:
“In all matters and usages they (Hindus) differ from us (Muslims).
He wrote:
“They are totally differ from us in religion, as we believe in nothing in which they believe and vice versa.”
According to Beruni:
“the Hindus considered the Muslim “Malachha” i.e. impure and for bid having any connection with them, be it intermarriage or any bond of relations hip, or by sitting, eating and drinking with them, because thereby, they think they be polluted.
Expressing his views on Hindu-Muslim relations in the twentieth century Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah observed:
“The Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religious philosophies, social customs and literature. They neither intermarry, nor interdine together, and indeed they belong to two different civilizations which are based on conflicting ideas and conceptions. Their aspects on life and of life are different.”
TNT: DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE HINDUS AND MUSLIMS
Here is a Pakistani patriot arguing about the differences between the two nations:
“Dress codes between Hindus and Non-Hindus are apparent in any gathering, specially among women. Standards of modesty for women are very very different. We speak Urdu, you cleansed Urdu of all Persian and Arabic words and speak Hindi. Your literature consists of Tagore and others, ours of the later stages of Iqbal. Our heroes are your enemies (Auranzeb and Mahmud of Gazni). Our scoundrels are your heroes (Shivajee). Our architecture is Moghal in nature- symmetrical with domes and minars. Yours is stupa shaped and temple-like. Our temples are decorated with writings, yours are pictographic representations abhorrent to Muslims. Our civilization is traced from the deserts of Arabia, the sands of Persia and the fertile valley of the Indus.
Yours is traced from the depths of Somnath, and the war plains of the Ganges. Our names are different than yours. Our value systems are based on Judeo-Christian monothieism and the ten commandments. Yours are based on a conglomerations of books that originated in Hindu mythology. Your laws are based on the Hindu Rashtra (or secularism), ours on the ten commandments . We eat meat and relish beef. For you Sex is religious and requires display and celebration, for us sex is private and a duty for procreation. You are vegetarian and abhor beef . On religious holidays we pray and scrifice animals, you celebrate fire. We pray five times a day and want the aazaan to monitor our day, you go to temples every week. We pray towards Mecca, you go to pilgrimage to the Ganges. We bury our dead, you cremate them. We are all equal, you have a caste system. We share our foods, you cannot share between castes. We revere the widows, you used to burn them.We are required to slap back, you believe in ahmisa. We believe in heaven and hell, you believe in re-incarnation.”
HINDU ORIGINS OF THE TNT: The ” Two Nation Theory” had been in the Hindu pot since the 8th century and was formally enunciated by many in the Hindu Mahasab. Here is Mr. Sarvakar.
“Several infantile politicians commit the serious mistake in supposing that India is already welded into a harmonious nation, or that it could be welded thus for the mere wish to do so. These our well-meaning but unthinking friends take their dreams for realities. That is why they are impatient of communal tangles and attribute them to communal organizations. But the solid fact is that the so-called communal questions are but a legacy handed down to us by centuries of a cultural, religious and national antagonism between the Hindus and the Muslims. When the time is ripe you can solve them; but you cannot suppress them by merely refusing recognition of them. It is safer to diagnose and treat deep-seated disease than to ignore it. Let us bravely face unpleasant facts as they are. India cannot be assumed today to be a unitarian and homogeneous nation, but on the contrary these are two nations in the main, the Hindus and the Muslims in India.” Speaking at the Hindu Maha Sabha Session held at Ahmedabad in 1937, Mr. Savarkar. Quoted by Dr. Ambedkar in his book “Pakistan”
“I declare that the future of the Hindu race, of Hindustan and of the Punjab, rests on these four pillars: (1) Hindu Sangathan, (2) Hindu Raj, (3) Shuddhi of Moslems, and (4) Conquest and Shuddhi of Afghanistan and the Frontiers. So long as the Hindu nation does not accomplish these four things, the safely of our children and great-grandchildren will be ever in danger, and the safety of the Hindu race will be impossible. The Hindu race has but one history, and its institutions are homogeneous. But the Musalmans and Christians are far removed from the confines of Hindustan, for their religions are alien and they love Persian, Arab and European institutions. Thus, just as one removes foreign matter from the eye, Shuddhi must be made of these two religions. Afghanistan and the hilly regions of the frontier were formerly part of India, but are at present under the domination of Islam. . . .Just as there is Hindu religion in Nepal, so there must be Hindu institutions in Afghanistan and the frontier territory; otherwise it is useless to win Swaraj. For mountain tribes are always warlike and hungry. If they become our enemies, the age of Nadirshah and Zamanshah will begin anew. At present English officers are protecting the frontiers; but it cannot always be. . . .If Hindus want to protect themselves, they must conquer Afghanistan and the frontiers and convert all the mountain tribes.” Pratap of Lahore, Lala Hardayal in 1925. Quoted by Dr. Ambedkar in his book “Pakistan”
Critics that accused Golwalkar of fascism have often pointed to his extreme right-wing and Anti-Muslim bigotry. In his 1939 book, “We, Our Nationhood Defined”, Golwalkar expressed praise of Hitler, saying:
“To keep up the purity of the Race and its culture, Germany shocked the world by her purging the country of the semitic Races — the Jews. Race pride at its highest has been manifested here. Germany has also shown how well nigh impossible it is for Races and cultures, having differences going to the root, to be assimilated into one united whole, a good lesson for us in Hindusthan to learn and profit by.”
“The Christians committed all sorts of atrocities on the Jews by giving them the label “Killers of Christ”. Hitler is not an exception but a culmination of the 2000-year long oppression of the Jews by the Christians.”MS Golwalkar, Bunch of Thoughts, Jagarana Prakashana, Bangalore, 1966, p.210
As listed above it is Ironic that the TNT originated as a result of the parochial writings of major Hindu leaders like Mr. Savarkar, Haldi Ram, Golwaker, Lal Lajpat Rai who were proclaiming that Hindus and Muslims were separate nations and the Muslims should be expunged from the land of the Hindus. When the Muslims saw that the Hindus were targeting them, the Muslims decided to act.
Contrary to the common belief that Jinnah originated the two-nation theory, actually it was Savarkar who propounded the theory years before the Muslim League embraced the idea. Savarkar had commanded all the Muslims to leave ‘Bharat’ to pave the way for the establishment of Hindu Rashtra. When Jinnah introduced his two-nation theory, Savarkar announced, “I have no quarrel with Mr. Jinnah’s two-nation theory… It is a historical fact that Hindus and Muslims are two nations.”
“His (Savarkar’s) doctrine was Hindutva, the doctrine of Hindu racial supremacy, and his dream was of rebuilding a great Hindu empire from the sources of the Indus to those of the Brahmaputra. He hated Muslims. There was no place for them in the Hindu society he envisioned.” (Freedom at Midnight, by Dominique Lapierre and Larry Collins).
So the hate campaign against Muslims was well in place even before the partition of erstwhile British India. This and many other significant factors forced Jinnah to demand a separate nation for Muslims as he believed that Muslims would not be safe in India — a prophetic declaration indeed! There is no denying the fact that Jinnah was secular to the marrow and would never have wished to cut ties with India, but circumstances compelled him to do so. However, he had not harbored grudges against India or its leaders. He had kept his house on Malabar Hill, thinking he could weekend there, while running his country from Karachi on weekdays, but destiny had something else in store for the estranged neighbors of the Asia Partition.
When Nathuram Godse pumped three bullets into Gandhi, a section of the Hindu community compared him with Judas. The writing was on the wall. The divide was evident. In some areas people mourned the death of Gandhi, and in other areas they distributed sweets, held celebrations, and demanded the release of Godse. Gandhi’s crime was that he had demanded security for Muslims. Syed Alvi Teheran Times August 17th, 2008
The seeds of partition were actually sown by the stalwarts of Hindu Mahasabha, primarily the quartet of Savarkar, Gawarikar, Apte, and Nathuram Godse. Independent India’s history is testimony to the fact that in a conflict between the forces of secular nationalism and religious communalism, the latter has always ruled the roost. Secular forces have more often than not ended up playing into the hands of communal forces. Such has been the history of independent India, and it is again on display in Jammu.
The actual chronology was not so simple. Most Leaguers realized the fact that initial the Congress had been a moderate and liberal party, but could the fate of the Muslims be trusted on the Nehru dynasty. Could other religious movements not overtake the INC secular ideology. Would majoritarianism not destroy the Muslim ethnicity? The result of their action was Pakistan. The historical basis of the TNT can be traced back to Shivajee. The TNT was proposed by Lala Rai. The TNT was formally articulated from the Muslim side by Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, then announced by the president of the Muslim Leagues Mohammad Iqbal in 1930. It was preached by Quaid-e-Azam and adopted by the entire Muslim League. The TNT demanded the end of the artificial state called “India” that had been forced upon the people of the subcontinent by the British.
BRITISH ORIGINS OF THE TNT: The division of Sub-Continent into different Federating Units has an old history. It was a British MP, John Bright, who immediately after mutiny in 1857 suggested that the Empire be broken up into several smaller states (Ref: Liberty or Death by Patiriek French P. 88) with complete autonomy, ultimately becoming independent states.
MUSLIM ORIGINS OF THE TNT: Sir Sayyed Ahmed Khan and other reacted. John Bright again in 1877 clearly said ‘that after British withdrawal India will have five or six great independent sovereign states like those of Europe (Ref: Rahmat Ali by K. K. Aziz P.51 1987 Ed.).
The TNT wanted the subcontinent to be returned to its pre-British status that existed through the centuries, the status that had allowed many states to exist in the subcontinent. India had more than five hundred independent states even during the British colonial era. The Lahore Resolution demanded the partition of the subcontinent (and the creation of TWO Muslim states in the subcontinent) on the basis of the TNT in 1940. The TNT was proven in 1947 when India was “partitioned” and “India” returned to its natural and normal state, which consisted on many nation states. In 1947 the TNT became the The Nationalities Law.
BECAUSE OF THE FAULTY BOUNDARY COMMISSION MUSLIM LANDS WERE TRUNCATED AND MUSLIMS WERE ETHNICALLY CLEANSED OUT OF THEIR HOMES.
“The greatest migration in history was the exchange of 11.5 million people between India and Pakistan in 1947 accompanied by the massacre of another half a million. The migration of 3.5 million Afghan refugees into Pakistan from 1979 to 1987 was almost as disruptive. The separation of Bangladesh was, until the dismemberment of the Soviet empire in 1991, the only successful secession of the post World War II era. Three wars with India over what is essentially a boundary dispute bloodied with ethnic cleansing in Kashmir, and now continued turbulence and terrorism based in part on drug distribution and in part on the presumption of the development of nuclear weapons capacity. Ralph Braiabnti
PAKISTANI STABILITY:
“The critical role of Pakistan as a factor in international stability and global politics can only be appreciated when it is placed in the context of a global resurgence of Islamic identity. The pre-eminent characteristic of Pakistan is its Muslim episteme. When established in 1947 in the name of Islam it was the most populous Muslim nation in the world. While the secession of Bangladesh in 1971 reduced it to second place after Indonesia, it remains one of the most conspicuously fervent of the fifty-four member states of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) that declare themselves constitutively Islamic. The invocation of Islam as its raison d’etre places Pakistan as one of the few nations, along with the United States, Israel and Saudi Arabia founded explicitly on religious doctrine rather than by historical accident or colonial invention. A realistic assessment of its role in the world requires a survey of its ideological universe – Ummah – the global commonwealth of Muslims.Ralph Braibanti.
THREATS TO “INDIA”
“Yet it is the India of Gandhi which remains in the American imagination and distorts at every angle our impressions of India and hence our view of Pakistan. Modern India unambiguously regards itself as the dominant power in the region. It has waged war with China, three wars with Pakistan, occupied the disputed territory of Jammu and Kashmir, annexed the Portuguese enclave of Goa, seized the princely Muslim state of Junagadh, annexed the Himalayan state of Sikkim, exerts political control over Nepal and Bhutan, intervened militarily in Pakistan’s civil war which established Bangladesh, intervenes in the Tamil-Sinhalese violence in Sri Lanka, continues to conflict with Pakistan over the boundary of the Siachen glacier and is adamant in its refusal to implement a series of United Nations resolutions starting in 1948 calling for a plebiscite in Kashmir. In view of these well-defined instances of hegemonic impulse there can be little wonder about Pakistan’s concern that its security technology should match India’s. In his autobiography, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, analyzed the strategy of the United States to bring India and Pakistan together as a buffer against China. He deftly characterized the Pakistani view of India, “The idea of becoming subservient to India is abhorrent and that of cooperation with India, with the object of promoting tension with China, equally repugnant.”
THREATS TO PAKISTAN ARE ALWAYS EXAGGERATED:
“The capacity of Pakistan to sustain some fifteen major disarticulations in polity, power, and structure and still preserve a national identity is a phenomenon one is tempted to explain by recourse to the supernatural Pakistan which has been pummelled by external events (three wars with India, secession of Bangladesh, 3.5 million Afghan refugees) and disrupted by internal fissures (4 periods of martial law totalling 27 years and ethnic violence in Sindh) to a degree which no other state established since 1945 has suffered. In this respect it stands as an exemplar of a nation whose adversities “common sense” might suggest make its viability impossible. Yet its continued existence defies the reality induced by such speculation. The enormity and persistence of these difficulties and the resilience of the nation in absorbing and somehow surviving them must be regarded with awe if not admiration.”
PAKISTAN MANZIL NAHIN NISHAN E MANZIL HAI: Alama Iqbal showed us the “manzil”. We don’t want a caliphate nor a religious theocracy; Not a means to wage war or expansion; Not through conquest or capturing capitals; not to threaten anyone, but just so that we can all live together in peace.
“Unlike any other Muslim nation, Pakistan has a complicated web of relationships with the entire world of Islam (Ummah). It is a mistaken notion to think of Pakistan exclusively in the context of South Asia or the South Asian subcontinent. Having fragmented from that subcontinent with no exclusionary topographical boundaries separating it from the Indian states of Punjab and Rajasthan and the disputed area of Kashmir, that assumption is easy to make. But it is erroneous. The topographical barriers separating Pakistan from its western and northern neighbours – Afghanistan, Iran and China – are much more formidable, but the cultural affinities are greater still. Afghan-Pushtu culture oversteps the Durand Line. Baluch-Brahui tribal culture is found in the Baluchistan of Pakistan and in the Baluchistan of Iran.
These links with its western neighbours existed long before pre-partition India. Indeed all the boundaries in the area, such as the Durand Line, the Radcliffe Boundary and the McMahon Line were drawn to satisfy colonial interests; not to delineate ethnic/linguistic/cultural identities. The relationship with Afghanistan, always fraught with difficulties, has been woven into a denser web in consequence of Pakistan’s pivotal role in the Soviet-Afghan War. The links with Turkey and Central Asia have historical roots. The Muslims of the subcontinent absorbed, as Ishtiaq Husain Qureshi has so poignantly written, “layers of immigrants from Arabia, Iran, Central Asia and the Afghan mountains; the greatest impact was made by the Central Asians, because they seem to have been the most numerous and also because the ruling dynasties were overwhelmingly Turkish.” Qureshi states that the painting of such artists as Chugtai and poets such as Hali, Iqbal and Ghalib all have an Iranian flavour. He quotes the “great thinker” Shah Waliu’llah who suggests that the Muslims of India were travellers in a strange land dreaming of the roses, nightingales, cypress forests and running springs of Iran and Central Asia. This romanticized view of the wellsprings of Pakistani culture was reinforced by the separation of Bangladesh in 1971 and the emergence of strengthened bonds with the Islamic states to the West.
“Tu shaaheen hai, basaira kar pharaon kee chatanon pur”
1. If your heart is alive and alert then gradually Allah gives his banda different way to look at things.
2. Both Mulla and Mujahid say Allah-O-Akbar, Although words and meaning are same, but there is a difference in purpose
3. Although both Vulture and Falcon fly in the same sky, both have different way of living, vulture flies low and lives on dead bodies, where as falcon flies high and lives on preys.
“The economic and political facet of this cultural affinity takes form in the Economic Cooperation Organization established in 1993 by ten contiguous states – Pakistan, Iran, Turkey, Afghanistan and the six Central Asian Islamic Republics. It supersedes the entity known as Regional Cooperation Development (RCD) formed in 1964 by Turkey, Iran and Pakistan which was never very effective. This new organization (ECO) holds greater promise than the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation of 1983 (SAARC). The latter has been crippled by the relatively overwhelming size of India and fear that India’s conduct defines a hegemonic propensity of ultimate danger to Pakistan. The relative success of the Economic Cooperation Organization and the failure of SAARC are institutional reflections of the tighter linkage of Pakistan with Central Asia than with the subcontinent. The connections with the Arabian Peninsula are also significant. Changing the name of the industrial city of Lyallpur to Faisalabad after Saudi Arabia’s late monarch, Saudi Arabia’s financing the International Islamic University in Islamabad and the King Faisal Mosque, one of the largest in the world, are but a few symbols of the Arabian connections.
The training of large numbers of Mujahideen (freedom fighters for religion) in Pakistan to fight in the Afghan-Soviet war, and the participation in that war of Saudi Arabian fighters has had a curious aftermath. Many of these warriors, left without a cause, are now in Bosnia along with Iranian mercenaries. Some are said to be in an underground resistance movement against the Saudi regime. If this is so, it thrusts Pakistan ever more deeply into the maelstrom of international Muslim political activities.” Ralph Baiganti
Step one: Current day Pakistan
Step two: Take control of Pashtun areas
Step 3: Confederation of Afghanistan and Pakistan.
This is Central Asia
Step 4: Work with the Muslim world
Step 5: Grow the Muslim world
STRATEGIC POSITION OF PAKISTAN:
“The critical geopolitical position of Pakistan recalls the views of Sir Halford J. Mackinder, Professor Karl Hausholer and Admiral Alfred Thomas Mahan. It was Mackinder. writing in 1904 who first used the expression “geographical pivots of history. He advanced the idea of the “heartland” i.e. that whoever controls a central strategic or pivotal area, controls the surrounding, area, the range of control expanding in concentric circles. These ideas profoundly influenced Karl Haushofer, an army major general then professor of geography at Munich University. Haushofer was introduced to Adolf Hitler by Rudolf Hess. Haushofer’s theories influenced Hitler but eventually Hitler ignored his advice and sent him to a concentration camp. Haushofer’s son, Albrecht, an art historian who had also written on geopolitics, was imprisoned participation in a conspiracy to overthrow Hitler and was executed by a firing squad. Shortly thereafter, his father committed suicide. Admiral Mahan advanced the same notion in terms of seapower – whoever controls the sea has influence if not control over adjacent landmasses.
The precipitous decline in the respectability of geopolitics during and after the Second World War was due in part to the repugnance toward anything associated with Nazi doctrine or behaviour. Haushofer’s early influence on Hitler was widely regarded as the ideological paradigm for Hitler’s grand design of conquest. The fact that Haushofer was banished for advising against the German invasion of the Soviet Union did not lift the stigma. Later, nuclear warfare with the possibility of long-range destruction seemed to minimize the need for actual control of areas of land or sea. The geopolitical explanation of global strategy can be carried too far. The Mackinder-Haushofer paradigm was extremist in the sense that it did not take other factors such as climate and human behaviour into account. Ellsworth Huntington, a pioneer in analyzing geographical influences on human development, labels the Mackinder-Haushofer theories “fallacious”.
The blemish of their association with Nazi policy is evident in Huntington’s criticism. Writing during the height of Hitler’s power, he groups the Mackinder-Haushofer paradigm with the racist theories of Houston S. Chamberlain and Count Joseph A. deGobineau. In recent years there has been a marginal renewal of interest in the influence of geography on politics. The awareness of the criticality of “chokepoints” or “flashpoints” has contributed to this new interest. It is neither prudent nor accurate to label this development as geopolitics. The simple term “political geography” as developed by Isaiah Bowman as early as 1921 is a more useful and accurate designation. In the past decade a growing number of analysts of international politics such as Paul Kennedy, Ewan Anderson, William Pfaff, Saul Cohen, Jack Child have turned to classical geography for some explanation of contemporary issues. The rising incidence of low intensity non-nuclear conflicts in which control of pivotal areas of land and sea is critical also contributes to a reassessment of geography. Pakistan fits perfectly into a politico geographic paradigm. The geographic arc embracing Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan to the west and Kashmir to the east may well be the next source serious of conflict in the world. It may originate in the west, in the east or in both places at once.
The disintegration of the Soviet Union created a geopolitical vacuum in Central Asia. The invasion and occupation of Afghanistan has created new allies. The rise of China creates new realities in West Asia. The resurgence of Islam in the six Central Asian republics and in Xinjiang has provoked competing ambitions of Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia for influence in the area.
All the superpowers are staking out their territory in the rich lands of Central Asia. The continued instability of Afghanistan and increase the danger. Pakistani- Chinese nexus and the growing Pakistani-Russian entente places Pakistan in a pivotal position. All of India’s neighbors share a distrust of India. Pakistan is at the epicentre not only by virtue of geography, but also because of its history, religion, culture and ethnicity. Whatever fire may emerge from this tinderbox, Pakistan will be a pivot. Pakistan can turn the spigot off or on. Bharat if it ever wants to be a local or regional player must recognize Pakistan, in letter and spirit and embrace it as a friend. Without India’s acceptance of Pakistan, its regional ambitions will never come to fruition.
In 2009, the Dalit, Muslim and Communist again tried to form alliance against the Indian National Congress. The alliance did not win. The 450 million, Dalits, Untouchables and Scheduled castes are Bharat have been left out. This is the unfinished business of 1947. The liberated Dalits will one day once again write the history of South Asia.
” the differences in India, between the two major nations, the Hindus and the Muslims are a thousand times greater when compared with the continent of Europe.
India is not a national state, India is not a country, but a sub-continent composed of nationalities, the two nations being Hindus and Muslims whose culture and civilization, language and literature, art and architecture, name and nomenclature, sense of value and proportion, laws and jurisprudence, social and moral codes, customs and calendar, history and traditions, aptitudes and ambitions, outlook on life and of life are fundamentally different nay in many respects antagonistic. Mohammad Ali Jinnah
British rule and its tail end haunt South Asians. Each country has its own version of history–clinging to their version of events. Despite thousands of books written on the events of 1946 and 1947, there is no consensus either about the events, or their motives. Investigating history is a dangerous endeavour in Delhi. Discussing Jinnah in Bharat (aka India) can be a career debilitating event for anyone. Expressing ones mind about the Pakistan movement can be dangerous to one’s vocation, specially if you are a leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
The Congress Party of Bharat doesn’t go through the the periodic convulsions that the BJP goes through. Congress Party officials toe the “company line” on Jinnah. Mohammad Ali Jinnah is reviled by the party and his demonization is tought to school children all over Bharat who grow up hating the man, and the founder of Pakistan. Bharati history books are replete with condemnation of the man and his mission–focusing on rumor, innuendo and every trick in the book that tarnishes the image of one of the greatest politicians of our time. Why we created Pakistan? One Nation Theory vs Two Nation Theory:
There are no second opinions on Jinnah in India. All conflicting opinions are treated as treason and quickly stifled. By eliminating all shades of opinion about the Muslim League, the Bharati research establishment guarantees the same mistakes to be repeated again and again. Understanding Jinnah helps in understanding Pakistan and Pakistanis. Demonizing him creates hatred, bigotry and racism.
The history of Bharat focuses on “Direct Action Day” but doesn’t discuss the reasons leading up to the frustration of the Muslims of the Subcontinent. Bharatis learn about Gandhi’s fasting but see that the fast against the separate electorates denied the Dalits their right–for which they hate Gandhi forever. Why India’s Dalits hate Mohandas Gandhi?
The followers of Netaji, Subash Chandra Bose have no love lost for either Gandhi or for Nehru either. That is the reason Bose is marginalized in Bharati history. Critical Analysis of Jawaharlal Nehru by Subhas Bose
Jaswant Singh is right about the Cabinet Mission Plan. This according to Stanley Wolpert was an act of genius–the prefect solution for a multi-ethnic and multi-religious conglomeration of states of South Asia. The Congress led by Nehru and Gandhi could not accept the devolution of power in the hands of the people. Nehru and Gandhi would not give the Dalits and Scheduled classes separate electoral and elect their own leaders. Jinnah won the right to separate electorate for the Muslim. Dr. Ambadekar was close to the getting the same rights, but was blackmailed by Gandhi’s fast into giving up the right of separate electorate for th Dalits. Dr. Ambadekar later admitted that this was the greatest blunder of his life. By merging the Dalit body politics in the mainstream, the voting power of the Dalit and the Untouchables–and Mayawati tokenism aside, they remain enslaved. Nehru and Gandhi wanted to keep everyone under the diktat of the Brahman leadership.
As a result of the work of Jinnah, at least two thirds of the Muslim escaped the enslavement (see Sachaar Report), but the Dalits remain in bondage.
Mr. Singh’s ephiphany about Jinnah’s charcater is echoed by in rare forthright admisison of “The Times of India“ (TOI) which provokes its leaders with the following headlines “Jaswant’s view on Jinnah has scholarly backing“. But the TOI has it only partially right. The most accurate source on Mohammad Ali Jinnah is not Ayesha Jalal’s critical analysis of the man. The best source of information on Jinnah is Stanley Wolpert (if you must have a gora as a source) and the Mohammad Ali Jinnah Foundation of Pakisan. The Pakistani historians, Salima Karim (Mohammad Ali Jinnah was not secular), Dani and others have meticulously researched every aspect of the life of the founder of the nation. Of course the research that portrays him in a good light is not sensationalized by triumphant Bharati media.
It is a lot easier to fall back to accept the stereotype of Jinnah than to see him for what he was, Asia’s most brilliant barrister who made a constitutional case for Pakistan and won his argument against Gandhi, Nehru, the entire Congress and the British Empire.
Ayesha Jalal, professor of history at Tufts University, has for long spoken about Jinnah’s failed quest to remain within a united India while guaranteeing the Muslim community equal rights.
Her book “The Sole Spokesman: Jinnah, the Muslim League and Demand for Pakistan” is widely regarded as the most definitive work on Jinnah and the circumstances that led to the creation of Pakistan.
“My understanding of Jinnah, and I have done substantial research on him, is that he never really abandoned the idea of a united India,” Jalal says in an upcoming documentary on Jinnah and the creation of Pakistan by US-based journalist Mayank Chhaya.
“A united India for him included a Pakistan. He invoked Pakistan based on the Muslim majority provinces of the northwest and northeast as a way of acquiring substantial amount of power at the all India centre,”Jalal says. Jaswant’s view on Jinnah has scholarly backing IANS 19 August 2009, 01:20pm IST. TOI.
Promulgated on 16 May 1946, the Cabinet Mission Plan would have created a united dominion of India as a loose confederation of of states:
A united Dominion of India would be given independence.
1) Group A: Muslim-majority provinces would be grouped – Baluchistan, Sind, Punjab and NWFP would form one group
2) Group B: Bengal and Assam would form another group.
3) Group C: Hindu-majority provinces in central and southern India would form another group.
4) The Central government would be empowered to run foreign affairs, defence and communications, while the rest of powers and responsibility would belong to the provinces, coordinated by groups.
6) Later iterations of f the plan called for A constituent Assembly consisting of 389 members – 292 from provinces, 4 from the territories governed by chief Commissioners and 93 from Indian Princely States – would draft the Constitution of India.
Jinnah and the Muslim League accepted the plan. Nehru and the Congress also accepted it but later rejected it. They could never accpect parity between the Muslims and the Hindus. The British government initially refused to call the Muslim League to form a government but under pressure of the Direct Action Day acquiesced.
This map shows the struggle of the Muslims of South Asia. Continent of Dinia and dependencies Ch. Rehmat Ali map depicting Muslim rule in South Asia after the British left. The Muslim homeland that was part of the struggle for independence. Rehmat Ali and the Muslims wanted the region returned to Muslim rule as it was before the British arrived
In tracing the history of developments that she says led to the movement for Pakistan as a separate state, Jalal focuses on the Cabinet Mission Plan of 1946 whose mandate was to discuss the transfer of power from the British rulers to Indians as well as discuss the framing of the constitution.
In a sense the Cabinet Mission Plan was about “layered or shared sovereignty”, Jalal argues. She was referring to a three-tiered arrangement proposed in the plan which included a federal union of India, the grouping of provinces as the middle tier (which Jinnah supported) and provinces as the third-tier.
“Throughout the discussion of the Cabinet Mission the Congress Party was not willing to have the centre reduced to three subjects — defence, foreign affairs and communication. They wanted a broader vision.
“When Jawaharlal Nehru made his famous statement that there is nobody who can stop the Constituent Assembly from enhancing the powers of the centre and we do not believe in grouping, it became untenable for Jinnah to accept the Cabinet Mission Plan. It was at that point that you begin to see a movement for a Pakistan as a sovereign state,” Jalal explains.
She says what the Cabinet Mission gave Jinnah was “an option of a Pakistan that is based on a partition of Punjab and Bengal or remaining within the all India union with no necessary assurance of Muslim share of power at the all India centre. He accepted that, he accepted something less than a sovereign Pakistan.”
What made Jinnah “revert back to the idea of a sovereign Pakistan”, according to Jalal, was the rejection of the grouping by the Congress Party and once “it became clear that the Congress had no intention of sharing power”.
In Jalal’s telling, Jinnah was still “hoping against hope that the British will make an award and give him an undivided Punjab and Bengal”.
Jalal’s point that it was Nehru and the Congress Party that was unwilling to share power with Muslims tallies with what Jaswant Singh has said in his interview with a TV channel. “Nehru believed in a highly centralised polity. That’s what he wanted India to be. Jinnah wanted a federal polity,” Singh has been quoted as saying. Jaswant’s view on Jinnah has scholarly backing IANS 19 August 2009, 01:20pm IST
So what was the Cabinet Mission Plan? Why is it still being discussed today about 63 years. We use exceprt from “The Story of Pakistan” (http://www.storyofpakistan.com) to summarize the Cabinet Mission Plan.
Cabinet Mission Plan (16 May 1946) The last viable attempt to come to a peaceful solution to Indian independence and partition. The Indian elections of 1945–6 were won in the Hindu-dominated constituencies by the nationalist Indian National Congress (INC), and in the Muslim-dominated areas by the Muslim League. This raised the issue of whether independence was to result in a united India (as favoured by the INC), or one divided into Hindu and Muslim areas (as demanded by the Muslim League). On 23 March 1946, three representatives of the Attlee Cabinet, Lord Pethick-Lawrence, Stafford Cripps, and A. V. Alexander, went to India to find a solution. Their plan envisaged a three-tier government structure for a united India, with the lowest being the provincial level. The second tier would have created three zones consisting of the Muslim-dominated areas of the north-west and the north-east, and the Hindu-dominated rest of the subcontinent. Finally, the third tier bound these structures together into a loose federation. To lay to rest Muslim fears against Hindu domination, it provided also that after fifteen years, each individual zone was free to leave the union. Originally accepted by both parties, it was effectively scuppered by Nehru’s careless remark shortly afterwards, whereby he denied some of the Muslim rights negotiated so painstakingly, especially the right of the Muslim-dominated zones to secede after fifteen years. This killed off any residual goodwill with Jinnah, and led to India and Pakistan. Encyclopedia
1) The postwar Labour government in Britain was committed to independence for India. A second mission was sent to India by Prime Minister Attlee in 1946 for the preparation of independence. On 16 May this Cabinet Mission published a plan for transferring power to a united India, but over subsequent months it became clear that this plan would fail. The British Government therefore began to draw up alternative plans. It also appointed a new Viceroy Lord Mountbatten to take over from Lord Wavell who had failed to get the Indian parties to agree on any plan. In June 1947, Mountbatten announced that Independence would come at Midnight on 14 August 1947. British Library Archives
2) All of the British Government’s attempts to establish peace between the Congress and the Muslim League had failed. The results of the general elections held in 1945-46 served to underline the urgency to find a solution to the political deadlock, which was the result of non-cooperation between the two major parties. To end this, the British government sent a special mission of cabinet ministers to India.
3) The mission consisted of Lord Pethic Lawrence, the Secretary of State for India, Sir Stafford Cripps, President of the Board of Trade, and A. V. Alexander, the First Lord of the Admiralty. The purpose of the mission was:
i. Preparatory discussions with elected representatives of British India and the Indian states in order to secure agreement as to the method of framing the constitution.
ii. Setting up of a constitution body.
iii. Setting up an Executive Council with the support of the main Indian parties
4) The mission arrived on March 24, 1946. After extensive discussions with Congress and the Muslim League, the Cabinet Mission put forward its own proposals on May 16, 1946. The main points of the plan were:
a. There would be a union of India comprising both British India and the Indian States that would deal with foreign affairs, defense and communications. The union would have an Executive and a Legislature.
b. All residuary powers would belong to the provinces.
c. All provinces would be divided into three sections. Provinces could opt out of any group after the first general elections.
d. There would also be an interim government having the support of the major political parties.
5) The Muslim League accepted the plan on June 6 1946. Earlier, the Congress had accepted the plan on May 24, 1946, though it rejected the interim setup.
The Viceroy should now have invited the Muslim League to form Government as it had accepted the interim setup; but he did not do so.
6) Meanwhile Jawaharlal Nehru, addressing a press conference on July 10, said that the Congress had agreed to join the constituent assembly, but saying it would be free to make changes in the Cabinet Mission Plan.
7) Under these circumstances, the Muslim League disassociated itself from the Cabinet Plan and resorted to “Direct Action” to achieve Pakistan. As a result, Viceroy Wavell invited the Congress to join the interim government, although it had practically rejected the plan. However, the Viceroy soon realized the futility of the scheme without the participation of the League. Therefore, on October 14, 1946, he extended an invitation to them as well.
8) Jinnah nominated Liaquat Ali Khan, I. I. Chundrigar, Sardar Abdur Rab Nishtar, Ghazanfar Ali Khan and Jogandra Nath Mandal to the cabinet. Congress allocated the Finance Ministry to the League. This in effect placed the whole governmental setup under the Muslim League. As Minister of Finance, the budget Liaquat Ali Khan presented was called a “poor man’s budget” as it adversely affected the Hindu capitalists.
9) The deadlock between the Congress and the League further worsened in this setup. On March 22, 1947, Lord Mountbatten arrived as the last Viceroy. It was announced that power would be transferred from British to Indian hands by June 1948.
10) Lord Mountbatten entered into a series of talks with the Congress and the Muslim League leaders. Quaid-i-Azam made it clear that the demand for Pakistan had the support of all the Muslims of India and that he could not withdraw from it. With staunch extremists as Patel agreeing to the Muslim demand for a separate homeland, Mountbatten now prepared for the partition of the Sub-continent and announced it on June 3, 1947.
Expressing his views on Hindu-Muslim relations in the twentieth century Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah observed:
“The Hindus and Muslims belong to two ifferent religious philosophies, social customs and literature. They neither intermarry, nor interdine together, and indeed they belong to two different civilizations which are based on conflicting ideas and conceptions. Their aspects on life and of life are different.”
Many blame Jinnah for separating the Hindus and the Muslims. Most don’t understand that he adopted the Two Nation Theory from Sarawk and Haldi Ram who had espoused the “Shuddhi” (converstion), “Shangtram” (death and expulsion of all Muslim in Bharat.
Here is a quote from Dr. Ambedekar–the Dalit leader who defines “Pakistan” through Hindu eyes. Dr. Ambedekar quotes Haldi Ram.
“I declare that the future of the Hindu race, of Hindustan and of the Punjab, rests on these four pillars: (1) Hindu Sangathan, (2) Hindu Raj, (3) Shuddhi of Moslems, and (4) Conquest and Shuddhi of Afghanistan and the Frontiers. So long as the Hindu nation does not accomplish these four things, the safely of our children and great-grandchildren will be ever in danger, and the safety of the Hindu race will be impossible.
The Hindu race has but one history, and its institutions are homogeneous. But the Musalmans and Christians are far removed from the confines of Hindustan, for their religions are alien and they love Persian, Arab and European institutions. Thus, just as one removes foreign matter from the eye, Shuddhi must be made of these two religions. Afghanistan and the hilly regions of the frontier were formerly part of India, but are at present under the domination of Islam. . .
In an interesting book called “Birds of a feather flock together” by Anwar Shaikh the author says the following:
“The fact that the Indians did not have to fight the British for freedom, absolves them of the usually leveled charge of divide and rule. The British ruled several communities and they were politically and morally obliged to give a fair healing to all of them. It was the attitudes of mutual hatred, which contributed to the communal divisions, but came to be ascribed to the British. This is the truth that Gandhi described when he said:
….but if both of us – Hindus and Muslims – cannot agree on anything else the Viceroy is left with no choice .
It was not the British, who divided India: it is the Congress and the League that had agreed to partition as the solution and Mountbatten was not to blame” Gandhi assured
BOSTON: Years before veteran politician Jaswant Singh, who was expelled from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) Wednesday, a well-known historian here was championing Pakistan founder Mohammed Ali Jinnah’s many admirable qualities, including his passion for a united India.
Indian Empty Floating Hull Rust bucket & Flying Coffins It was all over the news in July 2009. Bharat (aka India) claimed that she had endogenously designed a Nuclear Submarine. As usual the triumphant Bharati news media was effusive in its compliments about the prowess of BharatiEngineering. The news was followed up with extensive interviews by [...]
باطل سے دبنے والے اسماں نھیں سو بار کت چکا ھي امتھاں ھمارا
Step one: Current day Pakistan
<img
src="http://pakhistorian.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/iqbal-poetry.jpg"
